
Sopy 1 



REFERENCE 
SHELF 

REPRINTS OF SELECTED ARTICLES 
BRIEPS.BIBLIOGRAPHIES , DEBATES 
STUDY OUTLINES OF TIMEIY TOPICS 



Volume 1 



Number 5 



The Towner-Sterling Bill 



(U. S. DEPARTWaNT OF EDUCATION) 



LAMAR T. BEMAN, Compiler 



t# 



B Se fi m 









X 



THE EW WILSON COMPANY <+** 



T 958UnivcrsifyAvc.NewYorkCite 





****$*& 



The Reference Shelf 

is published to make available when needed good debates, 
collections of articles, briefs, bibliographies and study outlines, 
on timely subjects for public discussion. Each number is de- 
voted to a single subject. To make the material available at 
the time of greatest need, publication is irregular. Each vol- 
ume will contain at least ten separate issues, about 800 pages 
in all, and will cover about a year in time. 

Subscription price per volume (ten issues, 800 pages in all, costing 
if ordered separately, $7 or more). $4.50. 

Price for single copies, averaging 80 pages each, 75c, may vary 
for extremely large or small issues. Ten or more copies of one issue, 
one-third off. 

Volume I. Contents 

No. rt Cancellation of Allied Debt (Debate, briefs, refer- 
ences and reprints) 75c 

No. 2. China and Japan (Study outline) 50c 

No. 3. St. Lawrence River Ship Canal (Briefs, references, re- 
prints) 75 c 

No. 4. Kansas Court of Industrial Relations (Briefs, ref- 
erences, reprints) 75 c 

No. 5. Towner-Sterling Bill (U. S. Dept. of Education) 
(Briefs, references, reprints) 75c 

In Preparation 

Questions of the Hour. New ed. (Study outline) 

Enforcement of the Decisions of the Railway Labor 
Board (Briefs, references, reprints) 

Cabinet Form of Government (Briefs, references, reprints) 
Future issues to be announced 




$ft& 



-a*v 



Volume 1 V) ' December, 1922 Number 5 

The Reference Shelf 

Briefs, Bibliographies, Debates, Reprints 

of Selected Articles and Study Outlines 

on Timely Topics 

"Published by THE H. W. WILSON COMPANY 

g$8-g64 University Avenue fjew York City 

The Towner-Sterling Bill 

(FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION) 

■ JULIA E. JOHNSENj Compiler SkvwVA Vj- VImm,* 

INTRODUCTION * ^ ^_ yM 

Startling and amazing were the defects and shortcomings in 
our educational system revealed by the war. The preceding cen- 
sus had reported illiterate 7.7 per cent of the people ten years of 
age and over, but of the men called for military service and ex- 
amined as to intelligence 24.9 per cent were classified as illiterate. 
This difference may be at least partly explained by the fact that 
the census defines an illiterate as one who has never attended 
school at all, and perhaps partly by the further fact that the cen- 
sus enumerators ask the persons enumerated the various ques- 
tions about themselves and the members of their families, and 
accept their answers without further investigation. In a like man- 
ner the war showed that physical ailments and defects were much 
more general that anyone had supposed. More than one-quarter 
of the men called for service were rejected for general mil- 
itary service because of physical defects, most of which might 
have been prevented or remedied by health education or correc- 
tive physical training. The war also demonstrated the need for 
earnest work in Americanization, for many men called for ser- 



2 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

vice were unable to understand commands given in our language. 
The shortage of qualified and trained teachers, the inequalities in 
educational opportunities, the backwardness of many schools in 
still devoting so large a part of the students' time to subjects of 
no pratical value, are among the other defects of our schools. A 
considerable part of our teachers, particularly in the rural dis- 
tricts are only children. Some states, and more particularly some 
communities have utterly failed to provide adequate educational 
opportunities for their children, with the result that there are two 
and a quarter millions of children between seven and fifteen 
years of age who are not attending school, and about as many 
more between fifteen and seventeen years of age. 

These are the main defects in our educational system, but by 
no means all of them. In February, 1918, the National Educa- 
tion Association appointed a Commission on the Emergency in 
Education which considered these defects and drew up a bill de- 
signed to remedy them. It was introduced in the Sixty-fifth 
Congress, and again in the Sixty-sixth Congress, where it was 
revised and amended, and reported favorably by the committee 
in each house, but it received very little attention from that Con- 
gress. It was again introduced in the Sixty-seventh Congress 
where it is known as the Towner-Sterling Bill. 

To the discussion of the Towner-Sterling Bill this number of 
The Reference Shelf is devoted. Whether this bill is the proper 
remedy for the grave shortcomings and defects in our education- 
al system or not may properly be a matter for discussion and a 
matter of difference of opinion, but it is certainly disheartening 
and discouraging to read the trash that often fills the pages of 
the Congressional Record and usually fills the pages of the aver- 
age newspaper while so little attention is given to a matter so 
vital to our national welfare as the proper measure to remedy the 
defects in our educational system. 

Lamar T. Beman 

December 26, 1922. 



BRIEF 

Resolved: That the Tozvner-Sterling bill should be enacted 
into law. 

Affirmative 
Introduction 

A. Explanation of the provisions of the bill. 

B. The attitude of the Federal Government toward public 
education in the past. 

I. There are serious defects in our present system of public 
education. 

A. Illiteracy is so prevalent as to be a national disgrace 
and a menace to our free institutions. 

i. About five millions of our people ten years of age 
and over (or 6 per cent of the population) are 
unable to read or write any language. 

2. Three million of these are native-born Americans. 

3. About one-quarter of the men examined as to 
intelligence when called for military service during 
the late war were found to be illiterate. 

4. For each one thousand of population there are 

sixty illiterates in the United States to one in 
Germany, to five in Switzerland, to six in the 
Netherlands, to nine in Finland, to ten in Norway 
and Sweden. 

B. The great number of unassimilated foreigners living 
in great colonies and perpetuating foreign ideals, and 
in some cases foreign loyalties, is a constant danger. 

1. There are about fourteen million persons of for- 

eign birth residing in the United States, five 
million of whom cannot read or write the English 
language. 

2. In many of our cities a large part of the popula- 
tion, sometimes one-third of it, is of foreign birth, 
while the foreign-born together with those of 



THE REFERENCE SHELF 

foreign parentage often make a majority, some- 
times more than three-quarters of the population 
of the city. 

C. There is a serious shortage of qualified and efficient 
teachers. 

r. Since the beginning of the World War thousands of 
public schools have been closed for a time at least 
because of the inability to get teachers. 

2. One-fourth part of the teachers in the public schools 

of this country is made up of people twenty-one 
years of age or under; one-half, twenty-five or 
under. 

3. A large part of the teachers in our public schools 
has not had the education or training properly to 

qualify them for teaching. 

4. A large part of the teachers takes up teaching as 

a temporary occupation and continues in it for 
only a few years. 

D. The neglect of health education and physical training 
in many of our public schools is undermining the 
vitality of the nation. 

1. One-fourth of the men examined for army service 
in the late war was found to have some physical 
defect or ailment which in many cases could have 
been cured by health education or correcting train- 
ing. 

E. Public education now needs from the Federal Govern- 
ment recognition of its dignity and its importance as 
a national problem, aid and support in its efforts, 
integration, coordination, and a voice in national de- 
liberations which can come only from representation 
in the President's Cabinet. 

II. The Towner-Sterling bill will remedy the shortcomings 
and defects in our system of public education. 

A. It provides the funds and the incentive for the rapid 
elimination of illiteracy. 

B. It will help and support the states in their Americani- 
zation work. 

C. It will greatly assist in providing a sufficient number 
of well educated and trained teachers. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 5 

D. It encourages and supports health education, physi- 
cal education, and physical training. 

E. It creates a Secretary of Education who shall be a 
member of the President's Cabinet and who shall be 
the head of the Department of Education in the Fed- 
eral Government. 

III. The Towner-Sterling bill is a practicable measure. 

A. Practically every other advanced nation in the world 
has a national department or ministry of education. 

B. The Federal Government has often aided and encour- 
aged public education by land grants, by gifts to the 
states, by the collection of data and statistics and the 
publication of studies and reports. 

C. The Federal Government has granted recognition to 
other fields of endeavor where it does not have the 
constitutional power to exercise control, e.g., Agricul- 
ture, Labor, and Commerce. 

D. Public education in this country is a national problem. 

1. Federal action alone can remedy the evils and 
shortcomings that now exist in our educational 
system. 

2. Illiteracy is self-perpetuating in a locality. 

3. Some states and some communities are very back- 
ward in educational matters. 

E. The supervision and control of education are left by 
this bill to the states, as the constitution provides, but 
the advice and financial aid of the Federal Government 
are given to the states, and coordination is made pos- 
sible. 

F. The bill has been sponsored by the National Education 
Association, and has been endorsed and approved by 
most of our ablest educators 

Negative 

Introduction 

A. Explanation of the bill. 

B. This is a radical change in the educational policy of 
this country. 



) THE REFERENCE SHELF 

I. The adoption of the Towner-Sterling bill is unnecessary. 

A. Public education in the United States is constantly 
improving. 

i. Improvements are constantly being made in build- 
ings, equipment, teachers, methods, and curriculum. 

2. The study of the dead languages is rapidly disap- 
pearing, giving place to vocational studies, health 
education, and other useful and valuable knowledge. 

3. Centralized schools are greatly improving rural 
education. 

4. By night schools and part time schools an effort 
is being made to reach adults who need more edu- 
cation. 

5. Our public schools today are very far superior to 
our private schools. 

B. Illiteracy is constantly and rapidly decreasing. 

1. Between 1900 and 1920 it decreased by about a 
million and a quarter. 

C. There is no cause for anxiety in the number of for- 
eign-born residents. 

1. Americanization is a new movement, but one that 

is being adopted quite generally where there is 
need of it. 

2. The foreign-born citizens were very loyal during the 
war. 

3. The children of foreign-born parents are almost 

invariably good citizens. 

D. The shortage of teachers during and just after the 
war was a temporary situation and was due to the 
conditions which the war produced. 

E. Each state can best solve its own educational problems 
unhampered by federal interference. 

II. The Towner-Sterling bill is unwise and undesirable. 
A. It involves grave dangers to public education. 

1. It will lead to federal domination of public edu- 
cation. 

2. It will tend to create uniformity, standardization, 
centralization. 

3. It will inject national politics into our public 
schools. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 7 

B. It is very unwise for the Federal Government, now so 
heavily in debt and imposing taxes so oppressive to the 
people and to industry, to undertake any new and un- 
necessary financial burdens. 

C. It is unfair and unjust to the states. 

1. It is an unwarranted interference with their con- 

stitutional rights. 

2. It is meddling with their internal institutions by 

outsiders who fail to understand their local needs 
and local conditions. 

3. It will compel the people of some states to pay in 
part for the education of other states. 

III. The Towner-Sterling bill is impracticable. 

A. It is un-American. 

B. It cannot greatly improve conditions. 

1. Better qualified teachers can only be obtained when 
better salaries are paid. 

2. The funds named in the Towner-Sterling bill are 
totally inadequate for the purposes specified. 

C. It will over-organize education, creating a bureaucracy 
at Washington. 

D. It is opposed by some of our ablest educators, men 
like President Nicholas Murray Butler of Columbia 
University. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Bibliographies 

Mahoney, Robert H. The federal government and education. 

p. 76-9. Catholic University of America. 1922. 
U.S. Bureau of Education. The proposed federal department of 

education. 6p. Multigraphed. 1921. 

General References 
Books and Pamphlets 

American Council on Education. Arguments submitted in con- 
nection with a referendum on proposed federal legislation 
providing for the creation of a department of education and 
federal aid for education. 20p. about 1920. 

Education Bill : joint hearings before the committees on educa- 
tion and labor on Senate bill 1017 and House bill 7, July 10- 
22, 1919. i62p. Government Printing Office. 1919. 

Mahoney, Robert H., The federal government and education. 
Catholic University of America. 8op. 1922. 

Periodicals 

American Political Science Review. 15 : 335-49- Ag. '21. The 
educational function of the national government. Henry B. 
Learned. 

The Capitol Eye. 1 : 3-9. D. '21. The Towner-Sterling bill. 

Current Opinion. 70: 76-7. Ja. '21. Federal control urged to meet 
the crisis in education. 

Educational Review. 58:21-30. Je. '19. Education a national sys- 
tem. Horace A. Eaton. 

Educational Review. 62: 127-33. S. '21. The government and edu- 
cation. Samuel P. Capen. 

Elementary School Journal. 20 : 600-9. Ap. '20. A federal de- 
partment of education. W. P. Burris. 

Elementary School Journal. 20:610-17. Ap. '20. Desirable 
amendments of the Smith-Towner bill. Charles H. Judd. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 9 

Literary Digest. 69:26. Ap. 16, '21. The fight against federal 

aid for schools. 
Nation. 108:780. My. 17, '19. A Secretary of Education. 
New York Times. Sec. 7. p. 1+5. F. 20, '21. Federal education 

bill arouses controversy. 
School and Society. 9:613-18. My. 24, '19. The colleges in a 

nationalized educational scheme. Samuel P. Capen. 
School and Society. 10: 591-4. N. 22, '19. Why and how should 

we federalize education? H. A. Hollister. 
School and Society. 11:661-74. Je. 5, '20. The federal depart- 
ment of education. Charles H. Judd. 
School and Society. 14: 589-600. D. 24, '21. The relation of state 

and nation in educational policy. David Kinley. 
School and Society. 16:133-40. Jl. 29, '22. Documents on the 

Towner-Sterling bill. 

School Life. 1: 1 + 12. O. 16, '18. Introduces bill to create de- 
partment of education. 

School Life. 2:1-2. F. 1, '19. Department of education bill in- 
troduced in the House. 

School Life. 3: 3+8. Ag. 1, '19. Education bill discussed in Sen- 
ate. 

University of Illinois Bulletin, vol. 19, no. 23. Feb. 6, 1922. Pro- 
ceedings of a conference on the relation of the federal gov- 
ernment to education held Dec. 1 and 2, 1921. nop. 

Affirmative References 
Books and Pamphlets 

Bagley, William C. A federal department of education. Nat- 
ional education association : addresses and proceedings of the 
58th annual meeting, p. 449-58. 1920. 

Bagley, William C. Federal aid for public schools. National 
education association ; addresses and proceedings of the 59th 
annual meeting, p. 618-23. 1921. 

Beveridge, J. H. A national program for education. National 
education association : addresses and proceedings of the 57th 
annual meeting, p. 509-14. 1919. 

Campbell, P. L. The proposed federal department of education. 
Transactions and proceedings of the National association of 
state universities, vol. 16. p. 162-8. 1918. 



io THE REFERENCE SHELF 

James, Edmund J. A national program for education. Nation- 
al education association : addresses and proceedings of the 
57th annual meeting, p. 517-23. 1919. 

Keith, John A. H. and Bagley, William C. The nation and the 
schools. Macmillan. 1920. 

Kendall, C. N. A national program for education. National 
education association : addresses and proceedings of the 57th 
annual meeting, p. 514-17. 1919. 

MacCracken, John T. The bill for a national department of edu- 
cation. National education association : addresses and pro- 
ceedings of the 56th annual meeting, p. 191-5. 1918. 

Magill, Hugh S. Our legislative program. National education 
association : addresses and proceedings of the 57th annual 
meeting, p. 654-8. 1919. 

National Education Association. A department of education with 
a secretary of education in the President's cabinet. Special 
Bulletin no. 8. 4p. 1920. 

National Education Association. Education and the federal 
government. Hugh S. Magill. 8p. 1921. 

National Committee for a Department of Education. Facts about 
the educational bill. I2p. 1921. 

National Committee for a Department of Education. Facts about 
the education bill. iop. 1921. 

National Education Association. The Smith-Towner bill. Hugh 
S. Magill. 8p. 1920. 

National Education Association. The Smith-Towner bill em- 
bodies two fundamental principles differing from other fed- 
eral-aid bills. Special Bulletin no. 12. 4p. 1921. 

National Education Association. The Towner-Sterling bill. An 
analysis of the provisions of the bill ; a discussion of the 
principles and policies involved ; and a presentation of facts 
and figures relating to the subject. National Education Asso- 
ciation. 76p. 1922. 

National Education Association. Why a secretary of education? 
Special Bulletin no. 10. Hugh S. Magill. about 1920. 

Public School Association of the City of New York. National 
leadership in education. A reply to President Butler's criti- 
cism of the proprosed federal department of education. 1921. 

Strayer, George D. A national program for education. Na- 
tional education association : addresses and proceedings of 
the 57th annual meeting, p. 523-4. 1919. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL n 

Towner, Horace M. National aid for education. National 

education association ; addresses and proceedings of the 59th 

annual meeting, p. 786-95. 1921. 
United States. 66th Congress, 3d session. House Report, no. 

1201. Create a department of education. Jan. 17, 1921. 
United States. 66th Congress, 3d session. Senate Report, no. 

824. Calendar no. 791. Creating a department of education. 

Feb. 24, 192 1. 

Periodicals 

American City. 24:115-18. F. '21. A national point of view 
in education. George D, Strayer. 

Atlantic Monthly. 125 : 528-38. Ap. '20. Educating the nation. 
Frank E. Spaulding. 

Builder (National Masonic Research Society). 8:227-55. Ag. '22. 
Public School Number. Symposium. H.M. Towner et al. 

Child Labor Bulletin. 7:54-74. My. '18. Federal aid for edu- 
cation. Edward N. Clopper. 

Congressional Record. 58:3236-41, +3242. Jl. 28, '19. Depart- 
ment of Education. Hoke Smith, 

Congressional Record. 60:2060-2. Ja. 26, '21. The education 
bill. Hoke Smith. 

Congressional Record. 60:2102-3. Ja. 27, '21. Department of 
Education. Hoke Smith. 

Congressional Record. 60:2182-3. Ja. 29, '21. Department of 
Education. Hoke Smith. 

Congressional Record. 60:2359-61. Ja. 31, '21. Department 
of Education. Hoke Smith. 

Congressional Record. 60:2890. F. 10, '21. Department of 
Education. Hoke Smith. 

Congressional Record. 60:3038-44. F. 12, '21. Department of 
Education. Hoke Smith. 

Congressional Record. 61 : 1350-2. My. 12, '21. Federal aid to 
education. Kenneth McKellar. 

Educational Review. 60 : 271-84. N. '20. Why the Smith- 
Towner bill should become a law. George D. Strayer. 

Educational Review. 60 : 296-307. N. '20. The Smith-Towner 
bill. Hugh S. Magill. 

Educational Review. 60:308-14. N. '20. The national organi- 
zation of education. Charles R. Mann. 



12 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

Educational Review. 61 : 65-70. J a. '21. A reply to the arguments 
against the Smith-Towner bill. George D. Strayer. 

Educational Review. 63 : 102-9. F. '22. Federal organization 
for education. Charles R. Mann. 

Educational Review. 63 : 395-401. My. '22. The need of national 
organization for educational service. Olive M. Jones. 

Educational Review. 64:41-51. Je. '22. Federal aid for edu- 
cation. Paul H. Douglas. 

Elementary School Journal. 20 : 593-9. Ap. '20. Why we need 
a secretary of education. George D. Strayer. 

Elementary School Journal. 21 727-9. Je. '21. The Sterling- 
Towner bill. 

Journal of Education. 89:5-7. Ja. 2, '19. Brief of arguments 
in favor of S.B. 4987. 65th Congress, 2nd session. John 
A. H. Keith. 

Journal of Education. 91 : 154. F. 5, '20. Smith-Towner bill. 

Journal of the National Education Association. 10:155-8. N. 
'21. Education and the federal government. Hugh S. Magill. 

Nation. 106:256-7. Mr. 7, '18. A national department of edu- 
cation. John H. MacCracken. 

New York Times. Sec. 3. p. 1-2. Jl 21, '18. Plan to meet 
emergency in schools due to the war. George D. Strayer. 

New York Times. Sec 3. p. 2. S. 15, '18. New school system. 
Harris Hancock. 

Outlook. 123:123-4. S. 24, '19. If hogs, why not children? 

Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science. 9 : 534-8. Jl. 
'21. Federal expenditures for public education. Hugh S. 
Magill. 

School and Society. 7:405-6. Ap. 6, '18. A national depart- 
ment of education. 

School and Society. 7 : 472-3. Ap. 20, '18. The federal interest 
in education. Harvard Alumni Bulletin. 

School and Society. 10: 167. Ag. 9, '19. Senator Smith on the 
Smith-Towner bill. 

School and Society. 11:674-81. Je. 5, '20. National leadership 
and national support for education. 

School and Society. 14:259-63. O. 8, '21. Education and the 

federal government. Hugh S. Magill. 
School and Society. 14:455. N. 19, '21. The federal depart- 
ment of education. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 13 

School and Society. 15:113-15. Ja. 28, '22. National leadership 
in education. Public Education Association of New York 
City. 

School and Society. 16 : 250. Ag. 26, '22. The national edu- 
cation association president and the Towner- Sterling bill. 

School Life. 4: 15-16. Mr. 1, '20. For a secretary of education. 
William C. Bagley. 

School Life. 6:8. Ja. 15, '21. Federal aid — not federal control. 

School Review. 29:726-8. D. '21. A petition for a federal 
department of education. 

Teaching. 4:4-7. F. '19. Federal assistance to education in the 
several states. J. W. Crabtree. 

Negative References 
Books and Pamphlets 

Blakely, Paul L. The case against the Smith-Towner bill. 

America Press. 4op. 1920. 
Butler, Nicholas M. Over-organization in education. Columbia 

University Bulletin of Information. 22nd series, no. 10. p. 20-3. 

192 1. 
Burris, W. P. A federal department of education. National 

education association : addresses and proceedings of the 58th 

annual meeting, p. 444-9. 1920. 

Periodicals 

America. (National Catholic Weekly, 39 West 86 Street, New 

York City.) Contains about one hundred articles on the 

negative by Rev. Paul L. Blakely. S.J., beginning in October, 

1918. 
American School Board Journal. 58:24. Mr. '19. State or 

national control of education. A. S. Martin. 
American School Board Journal. 60 : 44-5. F. '20. A national 

department of education. A. S. Martin. 
Boston Herald. Jl. 6, '22. Why we oppose federal control of 

education, (editorial). 
Boston Transcript. Jl. 7, '22. Bill to Europeanize our public 

schools, (editorial). 
Boston Transcript. Jl. 8, '22. Millions for aid but not one cent 

for bribery, (editorial). 



i 4 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

Bulletin. Catholic Educational Association, vol. 16. no. 4. 
The federal government and education. William D. Guthrie. 
13P. Ag. 1920. 

Catholic Educational Review. 17:326-36. Je. '19. The Towner 
bill and the centralizing of educational control. Thomas E. 
Shields. 

Catholic Educational Review. 18 : 332-56. Je. '20. For the free- 
dom of education. 

Congressional Record. 58:3241-2. Jl. 28, '19. Department of 
Education. Charles S. Thomas. 

Congressional Record. 59 : 7478-80. My. 22, '20. Against fed- 
eral interference. William H. King. 

Congressional Record. 60:3044-9. F. 12, '21. Department of 
education. William H. King. 

Congressional Record. 60:3292. F. 17, '21. Letter of protest 
from faculty and students of Mount St. Michaels, of Hill- 
yard, Wash. 

Congressional Record. 60:3596-7. F. 22, '21. Protest of the 
Grand Forks Council of the Knights of Columbus. 

Congressional Record. 60 : 3915. F. 26, '21. Protest of the 
General Board of L'Union St. Jean-Baptiste d'Amerique. 

Congressional Record. 62: 10209-n. Je. 26, '22. The Smith- 
Towner bill. Caleb R. Layton. 

Congressional Record. 62:11437-41. Jl. 22, '22. Administration 
by collective authority. William H. King, et al. 

Educational Record. 1:118-31. My. '20. National problems in 
education. Charles H. Judd. 

Educational Review. 60 : 285-95. N. '20. Arguments against 
the Smith-Towner bill. Samuel P. Capen. 

Educational Review. 61 : 54-65. Ja. '21. Why the Smith-Towner 
bill should not become a law. Charles R. Mann. 

Educational Review. 61 : 70-9. Ja. '21. The Smith-Towner bill 
again. Virgil G. Michel. 

Educational Review. 63:402-11. My. '22. Federalization and 
state educational bankruptcy. Edward A. Fitzpatrick. 

Journal of Education. 87 : 453-4. Ap. 25, '18. A warning. C. P. 
Cary. 

New York Times. Sec. 7. p. 10. F. 19, '22. Education department 
bill. 

Pittsburgh School Bulletin. 14:453-61. Ja '21. Perils in the 
Smith-Towner bill. Elmer Kenyon. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 15 

School and Society. 10:495-8. O. 25, '19. The Smith-Towner 

education bill. W. P. Burris. 
School Life. 4: 14. Mr. 1, '20. Against a Secretary of Education. 

William P. Burris. 
Springfield Union. Jl. 6, '22. The Smith-Towner bill, (editorial). 
Teachers' Journal. 13:4-5. Ap. '20. The real Smith bill. 
Washington Post. Je. 16, '19. Priest attacks bill, — Rev. Mr. 

McDonnell warns of menace in education act. 



REPRINTS 

BRIEF HISTORY OF THE BILL 1 

The recent World War emphasized the shortcomings and de- 
fects, as well as the excellencies and strengths of the public- 
school systems of our several states. As never before the people 
became aware of the prevalence and extent of illiteracy, of non- 
English-speaking aliens and foreign settlements in our midst, of 
physical defects which might be remedied, of poorly qualified and 
inadequately paid teachers, and of glaring inequalities in educa- 
tional opportunities throughout the country. Each of these de- 
fects was seen to have a damaging influence on our successful 
prosecution of the war. The situation was described in a war- 
born term as an "emergency," but it existed before the war, and 
it still exists. It calls for remedy from the standpoint of the in- 
dividual, the community, the state, and the Nation because these 
educational defects are as disastrous to the individual, the com- 
munity, the state, and the Nation in times of peace as they are 
in times of war. 

Realizing its responsibility to the Nation — a responsibility 
growing out of its intimate acquaintance with these educational 
defects — the National Education Association in February, 1918, 
appointed a "Commission on the Emergency in Education." This 
commission was aware of the fact that the sovereign right and 
power to organize, supervise, and administer public education in 
the several states is vested in the states under the provisions of 
the Federal Constitution. The commission was also aware of the 
fact that the Federal Government has aided public education in 
the several states during its entire existence. This policy of fed- 
eral aid to public education in the states grew out of a clear per- 
ception by the founders of our Nation of the necessary relation- 
ship between education and democracy. The effective exercise of 
every sovereign power of our National Government is dependent 
upon intelligent, right-minded citizenship. An educated citizenry 
is the first great need of today, just as it was the first great need 
of the new republic in 1789. 

1 National Education Association. The Towner-Sterling Bill. p. 13-15. 



s 



i8 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

Bill Prepared by National Education Association 

The Commission of the National Education Association pre- 
pared a measure which was introduced in the Senate in October, 
1918, by Senator Hoke Smith, of Georgia, and which was known 
as the Smith Bill. This original bill followed quite closely the 
provisions contained in the Smith-Lever and Smith-Hughes Acts. 
Certain of these provisions were justly criticised as permitting 
too much federal interference. These objectionable features were 
eliminated and the bill carefully revised and reintroduced in the 
Senate at the opening of the special session of the Sixty-sixth 
Congress in May, 1918, by Senator Hoke Smith. It was intro- 
duced in the House by Representative Horace Mann Towner, of 
Iowa, and was known throughout the Sixty-sixth Congress as the 
Smith-Towner Bill. It was favorably reported by both the House 
and Senate Committees on Education near the close of the Sixty- 
sixth Congress in February, 1921, but did not come to a vote in 
either house. The bill was again revised, and at the opening of 
the special session of the Sixty- seventh Congress in April, 1921, 
was reintroduced in the House by Congressman Towner, and in 
the Senate by Senator Thomas Sterling, of South Dakota. The 
bill is known in the present, or Sixty-seventh Congress, as the 
Towner-Sterling Bill and is now pending in the Committees on 
Education of the Senate and House. 

PROVISIONS OF THE BILL 1 

The purpose of the Sterling-Towner Bill as stated in the pre- 
amble is "to create a Department of Education, to authorize ap- 
propriations for the conduct of said department, to authorize the 
appropriation of money to encourage the states in the promotion 
and support of education, and for other purposes." The principal 
provisions of the bill are as follows : 

1. A Department of Education is created with a Secretary 
in the President's Cabinet and an Assistant Secretary. (Sec.i, 2). 

2. The Bureau of Education is transferred to the Depart- 
ment of Education and Congress is authorized to transfer to 
it such other offices, bureaus and branches of the government as 
in its judgment should be administered by the Department of 
Education. (Sec. 3). 

1 By Robert H. Mahoney. The Federal Government and Education. 
p. 38-40. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BTLL jo 

3. Jt shall be the duty of the Department of Education to 
conduct studies and investigations in the field of education and 
report thereon. Research shall be undertaken in (a) illiteracy; 
(b) immigrant education; (c) public school education, and espe- 
cially rural education; (d) physical education, including health 
education, recreation, and sanitation; (e) preparation and supply 
of competent teachers for the public schools; (f) higher educa- 
tion; and in such other fields as, in the judgment of the Secre- 
tary of Education require attention and study. The Secretary of 
Education is further empowered to make appointments, or rec- 
ommendations of appointments, of educational attaches to for- 
eign embassies. (Sec. 5). 

4. Five hundred thousand dollars, or so much thereof as may 
be necessary, is appropriated annually for the purpose of paying 
salaries, conducting investigations, and paying expenses incidental 
to administration. (Sec. 6). 

5. The following sums or as much thereof as may be neces- 
sary are appropriated for cooperation with the states : 

a. Seven million five hundred thousand dollars is authorized 
to be appropriated for the instruction of illiterates fourteen 
years of age and over. 

b. Seven million five hundred thousand dollars for the 
Americanization of immigrants. 

c. Fifty million dollars for the partial payment of teachers' 
salaries, for providing better instruction and extending 
school terms, especially in rural localities. To avail itself 
of this provision, the state will maintain the following re- 
quirements as nearly as its constitutional provisions will 
permit : 

(1) A legal school term of at least twenty-four weeks in 

each year; 

(2) A compulsory school attendance law; 

(3) A law requiring that the English language be the basic 
language of instruction in the common-school 
branches in all schools, public and private. 

d. Twenty million dollars for the promotion of physical edu- 
cation. 

e. Fifteen million dollars for the preparation of teachers for 
public-school service, particularly in the rural. (Sees. 7-11). 

6. To secure the benefits of any one or more of the respect- 
ive apportionments authorized in sections 7-1 1 inclusive of this 
act, a state shall by legislative enactment accept the provisions 



20 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

of the act, and designate the state's chief educational authority 
to represent said state in the administration of the act. More- 
over, the state must appropriate for the purposes of the act a sum 
of money at least equally as large as the federal subvention in 
favor of said state. (Sec. 12). 

7. The chief educational authority of each state must report 
annually to the Secretary of Education showing the work done 
in said state in carrying out the provisions of the act. This act, 
however, shall not be construed to imply federal control of edu- 
cation within the states, nor to impair the freedom of the states 
in the conduct and management of their respective school sys- 
tems. (Sec. 13). 

8. A National Council on Education is created to consult and 
advise with the Secretary of Education on subjects relating to 
the promotion of education in the United States. (Sec. 17). 

9. The Secretary of Education shall report annually to Con- 
gress giving an account of all moneys disbursed and received by 
the Department of Education, and describing the work done by 
the department. He shall make such recommendations to Con- 
gress as will, in his judgment, improve public education in the 
United States. He shall also conduct such special investigations 
and reports as may be required of him by the President or by 
Congress. (Sec. 18). 

10. All acts or parts of acts in conflict with this act are re- 
pealed. (Sec. 19.). 



FEDERAL AID CONSIDERED HISTORICALLY 1 

It will be profitable to note the principles already established 
by educational acts of Congress. 

1. The Federal Government has established its right to en- 
courage public schools by grants of land. 

The Land Act of 1785 set aside Lot No. 16 in every township 
of the Northwest Territory for the maintenance of public schools 
within said townships. In 1848 this bounty was increased to two 
sections in each township. Under the first of these provisions. 
640 acres in each township were given to each of twelve states ; 
under the second provision, 1,280 acres in each township were 
given to each of sixteen states for public schools. 

1 National Education Association. The Towner-Sterling Bill. p. 25-6. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 21 

2. The Federal Government has established its right to en- 
courage public schools by appropriation of money. 

Oklahoma was given $50,000,000 when admitted as a state in 
lieu of certain sixteenth section lands, title to which was vested 
in the Indians. 

3. The Federal Government has established its right to en- 
courage the establishment of colleges and universities by grants 
of land and money. 

This has been done repeatedly. The first form of grant was 
the traditional "two townships" beginning with the grant to the 
Ohio Company. Later came salt lands, internal improvement 
lands, swamp lands, and finally, lands for the endowment of Col- 
leges of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts. The Hatch Act, the 
second Morrill Act of 1890, the Nelson Act, and the Adams Act 
have established the right to give money as well as lands for the 
maintenance and endowment of colleges. 

4. The Federal Government has established its right to enter 
into cooperative arrangements with the states for specific edu- 
cational purposes. 

This is shown by the various acts relating to the endowment 
of colleges, and also, in the Smith-Lever and the Smith-Hughes 
Acts, in which definite cooperative relationships were set up for 
the purpose of encouraging education. 

5. The Federal Government has established its right to en- 
courage all kinds of educational and welfare work. 

In 1921, the Federal Government, as is shown in a table on 
another page of this report, spent $149,608,482 for educational 
purposes. We have in the Department of Agriculture, the States 
Relations Service, and in the Department of Labor, the Chil- 
dren's Bureau, and also promotional agencies in other depart- 
ments. 

6. The Federal Government has established its right to pro- 
mote the preparation of teachers. 

The Smith-Hughes Act appropriates money "for the purpose 
of cooperation with the states in preparing teachers, supervisors, 
and directors of. . . (vocational) subjects." 

7. The Federal Government has established its right to col- 
lect and disseminate information. 

The Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor, and 
other departments, send out a great mass of such information 
yearly. The Bureau of Education in the Department of the 



22 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

Interior has for years sent out bulletins containing educational 
information. 

The foregoing acts of Congress have been in preparation for 
years, are now in operation, and have been undisturbed by any 
adverse court decision. They constitute, therefore, precedent 
sanctioned by law, and prove that the principle of federal aid for 
nationally desirable ends is clearly firmly established. 

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE MOVEMENT FOR 
THE RECOGNITION AND ENCOURAGE- 
MENT OF PUBLIC EDUCATION BY 
THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT * 

There are now ten departments in the Federal Government, 
each under the direction of a secretary who is a member of the 
President's Cabinet. The first seven of these, considered in the 
order of their establishment, have executive charge of affairs 
over which Ihe Federal Government has control under the pro- 
visions of the Constitution. The last three established, Agricul- 
ture, Commerce and Labor, deal with subjects not under the ex- 
clusive control of Congress, but which are promoted by the Fed- 
eral Government. Neither agriculture nor education is mentioned 
in the Constitution. The National Government can control 
neither ; in the interest of public welfare it can promote both. 
Constitutionally, they are in exactly the same relation. 

Agriculture Promoted by National Government 

The Department of Agriculture was established by act of 
Congress in 1862. It was created as an independent department 
under a commissioner who did not have a seat in the President's 
Cabinet. A study of the debates in Congress on the bill creating 
this department shows that there were members of Congress who 
felt that the Federal Government was exceeding its powers in 
undertaking to establish such a department. They pointed out 
that the power to control or regulate agriculture was not given 
to Congress and was, therefore, reserved exclusively to the states 
and to the people. These arguments were answered by other 
Congressmen who declared that it was entirely within the 
powers of the National Government to promote agriculture, be- 
cause its development was so essential to the welfare of the 

1 By Hugh S. Magill, Field Secretary of the National Education Asso- 
ciation. The Smith-Towner Bill: Legislation Commission Series, p. 3-5. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 23 

nation and of the people. They quoted Washington to show that 
he had recommended that the government promote the develop- 
ment of rural life and the agricultural interests of the country. 
They admitted that the Federal Government had no power to con- 
trol agriculture but declared that the establishment of the depart- 
ment was for its promotion, not its control, and in the interest of 
public welfare. 

After a thoro discussion of the subject, which was partic- 
ipated in by many of the greatest statesmen of that time, the bill 
was past by Congress and signed by President Lincoln. The de- 
partment started out in a modest way but under able leadership. 
It grew rapidly in public confidence because of the valuable re- 
search work which it conducted and the information which it 
gathered and disseminated. In a few years the opposition had 
practically died out, and we find the members of Congress vying 
with each other in their praise of the valuable service which the 
department was rendering. 

Department of Education Established in 1867 

A few years after the establishment of the Department of 
Agriculture, a movement was started to create a Department of 
Education to be organized along similar lines. The first definite 
action was taken by the Department of Superintendence of the 
National Education Association at a meeting held in Washington, 
D.C., in 1866. A memorial was prepared and presented to Con- 
gress. James A. Garfield, then a member of the House of Rep- 
resentatives and later President of- the United States, immediate- 
ly espoused the cause and a bill was introduced to create such a 
department. The Congressional debates on this bill are particu- 
larly interesting. We find that many of the arguments used for 
and against the establishment of a Department of Education 
were similar to those which had been used for or against the cre- 
ation of a Department of Agriculture five years before. The op- 
ponents of the measure insisted that the establishment of a De- 
partment of Education was too great an extension of federal 
power. The advocates of the measure referrred to the Depart- 
ment of Agriculture as a precedent, showed the splendid work 
which it had accomplished, and insisted that the promotion of 
education was of even greater importance. 

Congressman Garfield, who had charge of the bill, quoted 
from William Penn, who a hundred years before the establish- 



24 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

ment of our government, when working out his great plans for 
the establishment of a democratic colony in America, declared : 
"That which makes a good constitution must keep it, namely, 
men of wisdom and virtue ; qualities that because they descend 
not with wordly inheritance must be carefully propagated by vir- 
tuous education of youth, for which spare no cost, for by such 
parsimony all that is saved is lost." In support of his argument 
that the promotion of education should receive the attention of 
the National Government he quoted from Horace Mann : "In our 
country and in our times no man is worthy the honorable name 
of statesman who does not include the highest practical education 
of the people in all his plans of administration." 

Secretary of Education Advocated by Charles Sumner 

The bill passed the House and went to the Senate where it 
was supported by statesmen prominent in American history. No 
very serious opposition was manifested in the Senate against the 
general proposition for the establishment of a Department of 
Education. The debate was largely upon whether it should be 
called a Department or a Bureau, and whether it should be an in- 
dependent department like the Department of Agriculture, or be 
made a bureau in the Department of the Interior. It was decided 
to make it an independent department. Among those who earn- 
estly supported the bill was Charles Sumner, of Massachusetts, 
whose scholarly eloquence had many times influenced the Senate. 
In a speech in support of the bill, delivered on February 26, 1867, 
he declared : "Call it then, I say, a Bureau, or call it a Depart- 
ment, but give us the bill and do not endanger it at this moment, 
at this late hour of the session by any unnecessary amendment. 
For myself, Sir, I would, if I could, give it the highest designa- 
tion. If there is any term in our dictionary that would give it 
peculiar significance, I would prefer that. Indeed, I should not 
hestitate, if I could have my way, to place the head of the De- 
partment of Education in the Cabinet of the United States." A 
few days later the act was past by the Senate, approved by the 
President, and became a law. 

History shows that the newly established Department of Edu- 
cation did not fare as well as the Department of 
Agriculture. Those not friendly to the development of public 
education became very jealous of its influence and did everything 
in their power to embarrass the commissioner and discredit the 
work of the department. The National Education Association 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 25 

expressed its appreciation of the work of the department, but evi- 
dently took it for granted that it would be developed and ex<- 
tended as the Department of Agriculture had been. The friends 
of education failed to realize the subtle influence of the opposi- 
tion which was working secretly to break down and discredit the 
department before it could demonstrate its great usefulness, as 
the Department of Agriculture had done, and thereby become 
thoroly established. 

Foes of Public Education Destroy Department 

As a result of this organized opposition, which has opposed 
the extension and development of public education in this country 
from the beginning, not only from the national standpoint but in 
the states and communities as well, we find that before the de- 
partment was two years old a bill was slipped thru Congress abol- 
ishing it and transferring its functions to an office in the Depart- 
ment of the Interior. The salary of the commissioner was cut 
down and the annual appropriation for the work reduced from 
$20,000 to $6,000. And so the movement for the promotion and 
development of public education by carrying on extended re- 
search, disseminating useful information and giving encourage- 
ment and assistance to the states and to the people, was strangled 
at its very beginning. For more than fifty years, even down to 
the present time, education has remained without just recognition 
and with very inadequate support in a subordinate office of the 
Department of the Interior. The total appropriations for this 
office amount to less than $500,000 annually, more than half of 
which must be used to take care of the reindeer of Alaska, leav- 
ing less than $250,000 for the promotion of education thruout the 
United States. 

Agriculture Promoted — Education Neglected 

Let us turn for a moment to note the development of the De- 
partment of Agriculture during the years. It was fostered by 
Congress and generously supported by appropriations. It con- 
tinued to expand and develop until it became one of the most im- 
portant departments of the government. In 1899 it was elevated 
to equal rank with the other executive departments and the com- 
missioner made secretary with a seat in the President's Cabinet. 
Since being placed on an equality with the other departments it 
has developed remarkably until it is now recognized as one of the 
most useful and important departments of the Federal Govern- 



26 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

ment, carrying on a work which is not equaled by any similar de- 
partment in the world. The annual appropriation for the Depart- 
ment of Agriculture is more than $30,000,000. 

We find, therefore, that our Federal Government has followed 
the advice of Washington with respect to agriculture, but has 
permitted the foes of public education to prevent the carrying 
out of his advice with respect to education. Is it any wonder that 
we have become agriculturally the greatest nation in the world, 
providing not only for our own needs but feeding the hungry 
millions in nations less favored, while educationally we are hu- 
miliated by the fact that millions of American citizens cannot 
read intelligently the ballots they cast, each of which is supposed 
to register a freeman's will. 



THE PREVALENCE OF ILLITERACY 



1 • 



The accompanying table shows, according to the Federal 
census of 1920, that there were 4,931,905 illiterates ten years of 
age and over. 

ILLITERATES IN THE UNITED STATES 

I9OO 6,180,069 

I9IO 5,5l6,l63 

1920 4,931,905 

In twenty years the decrease has amounted to 1,248,164, or an 
average annual decrease of 62,408. If this rate of decrease con- 
tinues, illiteracy will not disappear for eighty years. This is a dis- 
couraging prospect. 

If we disregard the negro and consider the white population 
alone, we get less comfort, as the accompanying table shows. 

WHITE ILLITERATES IN THE UNITED STATES 

1900 3,200,746 

I9IO • 3,184,633 

1920 3,006,312 

There was a decrease of 194,434 in the number of white il- 
literates between 1900 and 1920, or an average annual decrease of 
9,721. At this rate it would require three hundred and ten years 
to remove illiteracy from our white population. If it had not 
been for the war, which prevented the entrance into the country 
of the usual thousands of immigrant illiterates, the situation 
would be even more discouraging. 

1 National Education Association. The Towner-Sterling Bill. p. 27-33. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 27 

During this same twenty- year span, 1900 to 1920, the native 
white illiterates decreased from 1,913,611 to 1,242,572, or an aver- 
age annual decrease of 33,552. At this rate, illiteracy among our 
native whites will not disappear until after a lapse of thirty-eight 
years. 

NATIVE WHITE ILLITERATES IN THE UNITED STATES 

1900 I,9I3,6l I 

I9IO 1,534,272 

1920 1,242,572 

The number of illiterates of voting age in our population in 
1920 was 4,333,111. This number is 16 per cent of the total vote 
at the 1920 Presidential Election. If the rate of reduction in the 
number of illiterates over twenty-one years of age, which took 
place between 1910 and 1920, is maintained, illiteracy will not dis- 
appear from among those over twenty years of age until one 
hundred and eighty years have passed. Now that the war is 
over, hundreds of thousands of aliens are once again entering 
our country each year. 1 The illiteracy law will decidedly cut 
down the number of illiterates admitted, but will not completely 
cut off the inflow of illiterates from this source, since certain ex- 
ceptions in the law allow illiterates to be admitted to the country. 
In 1921, with the law in full effect, 27,463 illiterate immigrants 
were admitted. 

It is well known that illiteracy does not disappear according 
to such regular decreases as have been assumed for illustration. 
It disappears only as the older illiterates are taught and as those 
who are under the age of ten are so taught that they do not be- 
come classed as illiterates. The complete elimination of illiteracy 
among the native-born whites and negroes is primarily a problem 
of education during the years of childhood — not a problem of 
adult training. One section of the Towner-Sterling Bill provides 
for teaching adult illiterates. Another section relates to the com- 
pulsory age of school children. 

Illiteracy Principally Among Native-Born 

When it is realized that of the 4,931,905 illiterates in the 
United States in 1920, 3,084,733 were native-born and 1,847,172 
foreign-born, the problem is more clearly revealed as principally 
one of improving our schools. The problem of teaching adult 

1 One million, two hundred thousand entered in the two years, 1920 
and 1921. Annual report of Commissioner General of Immigration, 1921. 
p. 37. 



28 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

native-born illiterates will, under the Towner-Sterling Bill, be a 
constantly diminishing one. 

Nor is the problem of illiteracy confined to any particular sec- 
tion of the country. The accompanying table shows that New 
York has more illiterates than any of the three southern states 
with the greatest number of illiterates, and that Pennsylvania 
contains more illiterates than any of the southern states, except 
Georgia. That the percentage of illiterates in New York state 
is smaller is beside the point. The fact remains that New York 
has the largest illiteracy problem in the United States. 

NUMBER OF ILLITERATES, 1020 

Northern states — 

New York 425,022 

Pennsylvania 312,699 

Illinois 173,987 

Southern states — 

Georgia 328,838 

Alabama 278,082 

Mississippi 229,734 

Although illiteracy has been reduced in numbers and percent- 
age in the country as a whole, in many of our more important 
states, it has increased during the decade 1910-1920, as the table 
below shows, in spite of the fact that the inflow of illiterates 
from abroad was largely cut off due to the war. In every one of 
these states there was an actual increase in the number of illit- 
erates and, for the twelve states, there was a total increase of 

" 7,344- 

No. of No. of 

illiterates illiterates 

Division and State 1920. 1910. 

Massachusetts 146,607 141,541 

Connecticut 67,265 53,665 

New York 425,022 406,020 

New Jersey 127,661 113,502 

Ohio 131,006 124,774 

Illinois 173,987 168,294 

Michigan 88,046 74,800 

Texas 295,844 282,904 

Colorado 24,208 23,780 

Arizona 39,131 32,953 

Washington 18,526 18,416 

California 95,592 74,902 

It should also be remembered that the right of free movement 
between the states, guaranteed by the Constitution, makes the il- 
literacy problem of any state, the potential problem of every state 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 29 

The J910 census shows that 22 per cent of our native-born popu- 
lation was living in states other than those of their birth. Trans- 
portation is becoming easier in the United States with each suc- 
ceeding year and we can look forward to a continual increase in 
inter-state migration. Illiteracy, therefore, cannot be looked up- 
on as being confined to or as the special problem of any state or 
group of states. It must be looked upon as a matter of national 
concern and only a general effort among the states to meet it will 
be successful. In this fact is found the justification for the en- 
couragement of the states through federal aid, as provided in the 
Towner-Sterling Bill. 

Federal Census Understates Illiteracy Problems 

All the figures thus far quoted in regard to the prevalence of 
illiteracy in the, country are based upon the federal census. There 
is evidence to justify the belief that the federal census greatly 
underestimates the importance of this problem, due to the defini- 
tion of illiteracy as made by those in charge of taking the census. 
In interpreting federal census figures it should be kept in mind 
that they are for what might be termed absolute illiterates. The 
following statements more clearly define this term. 

1. No test to determine illiteracy is made by the census 
enumerator, but the statement of each person enumerated, or a 
statement made in his behalf by some member of his family or 
another person, is accepted by the enumerator. 1 

2. A statement of a foreigner that he is able to read and 
write in a foreign language is sufficient to cause him to be re- 
turned by the enumerator as a literate. 1 

3. The Census Bureau classifies as illiterate any person ten 
years of age or over who is unable to write in any language, 
. . . regardless of ability to read. 2 

4. In general the illiterate population as shown by the census 
reports should be understood as representing only those persons 
zvho have had no schooling whatever. 2 

5. ... the "literate" population in this report should be 
understood as including all persons who have had even the 
slightest amount of schooling. 3 

An illiterate according to the federal census, therefore, is one 
who confesses to a total lack of schooling, or rather to a total 
lack of ability to write. On the other hand literates are defined as 
"persons who have had even the slightest amount of schooling." 

1 Quoted from communication from Mr. W. M. Steuart, Director of 
Census, dated April 13, 1922, directed to the National Education Association. 

2 Advance sheets from the Volume on Population. 1920 census, p. 4. 

3 Volume No. 1, 1910 census, p. 1185. 



30 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

When this definition of illiteracy is fully comprehended, the 
statement that there were five million illiterates in 1920 has a new 
significance. There are doubtless many illiterates who, due to 
the fear of the stigma of illiteracy, falsify their statements to the 
enumerator. In Volume 1 of the 1910 census we find the follow- 
ing statement on this point : "There is undoubtedly a certain mar- 
gin of error in the statistics of illiteracy. . . In some cases there 
may be unwillingness to admit illiteracy. . ." 

That the federal census was an understatement of the real 
problem of illiteracy was known before the war. It was not until 
statistics on illiteracy resulting from the draft became available, 
however, that it was realized how far the federal census really 
hides the problem of illiteracy. The draft figures indicate that in 
addition to the five million absolute illiterates, there are many 
other millions who for all practical purposes are illiterates in 
that they fail to possess the ability to discharge those civic duties 
that involve the ability to read and write with a reasonable de- 
gree of facility. The Director of the Census clearly recognizes 
this fact. An inquiry on April 11, 1922, was addressed to Mr. W. 
M. Steuart, Director of the Census, from the National Education 
Association in which the following question was asked : "If literacy 
were to be defined as follows : 'The ability to read a simple news- 
paper article in some language with reasonable speed and com- 
prehension and the ability to write a very simple friendly letter 
with reasonable speed and accuracy,' is it your belief that the fig- 
ures given in the 1920 census are an understatement or overstate- 
ment of the number of illiterates in the United States?" Mr. 
Steuart, in reply dated April 13, 1922, over his signature, gave the 
following : "If illiteracy were defined as sugested by you . . . the 
census figures would undoubtedly understate the number of illit- 
erates in the United States." (Italics ours.) 

Revelations of Selective Draft Startling 

But let us consider the facts concerning illiteracy as brought 
out by the draft examinations. In connection with the psycho- 
logical tests, all men were segregated into two groups, literates 
and illiterates. A total of 1,552,256 men were examined during 
the draft. The men examined were distributed among twenty- 
eight camps located in every section of the country. The figures 
below give the summarized results. 

Number of men examined 1,552,256 

Per cent illiterate 24.9 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 31 

The figures of the federal census show that in 1920, 6 per cent 
of the population over ten years of age were illiterate. The draft 
figures show that 24.9 per cent of all the men examined were il- 
literate. The principal cause of the difference between these two 
figures is probably the difference between the definitions of illit- 
eracy of the census and of the draft. The meaning of illiteracy, 
according to the census, has been explained above. The meaning 
of illiteracy according to the draft may be inferred from the fol- 
lowing, keeping in mind that literate men were supposed to take 
the Alpha examination and illiterate men, the Beta examination. 

1. In general it may be said that many of the camps aimed 
at an "ability to read and understand newspapers and write 
letters home" as a basis for the Alpha examination, and that 
the figures for the number of men taking Beta do approximately 
reflect this level of literacy. 1 

2. The men in charge of segregating the recruits for the two 
examinations were practically all college trained and had special 
training for army examining. 

3. In segregating the recruits into two groups, literates and 
illiterates, the examiners had in mind that the recruit had to be 
able to read sufficiently well so that he could do himself justice in 
a test involving the following type of reading matter : 

Test 2 — (Alpha Army Test) 

Get the answers to these examples as quickly as you can. 
Use the side of this page to figure on if you need to. 

Samples 1. How many are 5 men and 10 

men? Answer (15) 

2. If you walk 4 miles an hour 
for 3 hours, how far do you 
walk? Answer (12) 

1. How many are 30 men and 

7 men ? Answer ( ) 

2. If you save $7 a month for 
4 months, how much will you 

save ? Answer ( ) 

and so on for 20 increasingly difficult problems. 

4. Recruits not able to read and write in English were 
classed as illiterates and given the Beta examination. 

Draft Figures Verified by Camp Investigations 

The official report of Psychological Examining in the army 

1 Psychological Examining in the United States Army, official report of 
the Division of Psychology, under Surgeon General United States Army. 
p. 743- 



32 



THE REFERENCE SHELF 



contains, besides the total figures on illiteracy, representing com- 
bined figures from various camps, a number of studies of illiter- 
acy made in individual camps. The results of one of these studies 
made in Camp Wadsworth is quoted as typical. This study, as 
well as those made in the other camps, was made under the di- 
rection of commissioned officers, all of whom were trained psy- 
chologists. 

The percentage of illiterates for various localities represented 
in recent draft examinations is as follows : 



Locality 


Dale of draft 


Number 
examined 


Number 
illiterate 


Per cent 
illiterate 


New York State 
South Carolina 


May 25, 1918 
July 5, 1918 
July 24, 1918 


8,965 

981 

4,692 


1,484 
487 
670 


16.6 
49.5 


Minnesota 


14.2 







The above figures are most significant in the light of the 
fact that the drafted men from New York State include many 
foreigners. In spite of that fact the percentage of illiteracy 
(16.6) seems to be very small when compared with the per- 
centage of illiteracy found among the men reporting from South 
Carolina. In fact, the percentage for the latter group was 
found to be so high as to make us doubt the accuracy of the 
data. A check was therefore made as follows : The records 
of all South Carolina men in one company were analyzed, with 
the result that of the 177 men in the company, 109, or 61.6 per 
cent, were illiterate. It seems from this check that the per- 
centage of illiteracy (49.5 per cent) for the whole group from 
South Carolina is probably correct. 

Such a percentage of illiteracy as is found among men from 
South Carolina is startling. Among Virginia negroes reporting 
at Camp Lee, Va., in the fall of 1917 the percentage of illiteracy 
was 40 per cent. The conclusion is that the problem of illiteracy 
among South Carolina drafted men is a most serious one. 1 

The unexpectedly high percentage of illiteracy found in var- 
ious camps was similarly questioned in other camps in all sections 
of the country with the general result that searching studies re- 
vealed them to be substantially correct. The official report on the 
army tests summarized the whole situation regarding illiteracy by 
stating that "the extent of illiteracy among drafted men is a 
striking fact" and indicates "conditions of serious public con- 
cern." 2 

1 Quoted from Psychological Examining in the United States Army. 
official report of the Division of Psychology, under Surgeon General 
United States Army. p. 746. 

2 Ibid. p. 743. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 33 

Illiteracy Impairs Effective Citizenship 

The great difference between the figures for illiteracy given 
by the federal census and the army draft report is due principally 
to the difference in the definition of illiteracy as used in the two 
reports. It is not necessary to accept either one absolutely. The 
question of fundamental importance to the welfare of our nation 
is this : In a democracy in which universal suffrage is in force, 
can we longer safely disregard the facts that 6 per cent, or five 
million of our population, can be classed as absolute and con- 
fessed illiterates, and that 24.9 per cent of our young men are so 
limited in their literacy that they are unable "to read and under- 
stand newspapers and write letters home"? Fine distinctions as 
to the definitions of illiteracy and the exact percentage of illiter- 
acy in our population are beside the point. The fact clearly ex- 
ists that an alarming number of our citizens are so limited in 
their ability to read and write that they are obviously unable in- 
telligently to discharge their civic duties. The condition would 
be less startling if it had not already been shown that any great 
reduction in the amount of illiteracy in the country is unlikely 
in the immediate future unless the Federal Government encour- 
ages the states to undertake its removal. 

Less Illiteracy in Other Countries 

The position of the United States in its tolerance of illiteracy 
is unique among the enlightened countries of the world. The fol- 
lowing table gives the latest facts available for illiteracy in the 
principal enlightened nations of the world. 

ILLITERACY IN THE UNITED STATES AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES * 

Germany 1 % 

Switzerland 5% 

Netherlands 6% 

Finland 9% 

Norway 1.0% 

Sweden 1.0% 

Scotland 3-5% 2 

France 4-9% 

England 5-8% 2 

UNITED STATES 6.0% 

1 These data are from two sources: (a) Cubberley — History of Educa- 
tion, p. 714; (b) Communications from foreign legations received by Na- 
tional Education Association during April, 1922. 

3 The British Library of Information of New York states in 1922 "as 
far as England and! Scotland are concerned, illiteracy is practically un- 
known except among a few quite old people who did not enjoy the benefits 
of compulsory education which has been in existence for years." 



34 THE REFERENCE SHELF 



FOREIGN-BORN RESIDENTS 



According to the 1920 census, as the accompanying table 
shows, there were 13,920,692 foreign-born residents in the United 
States. 

FOREIGN-BORN RESIDENTS IN THE UNITED STATES 

1870 5,567,229 

l88o 6,679,943 

189O 9,249,960 

I900 10,341,276 

I9IO 13,515,886 

1920 13,920,692 

Foreign-Bom Population Increasing 

The number of foreign-born has been steadily increasing with 
each succeeding decade ; between 1910 and 1920 there was an in- 
crease amounting to 404,806. This was in spite of the fact that 
the war very decidedly cut down the number of alien immigrants 
admitted to the country during this decade, as the table below 
shows. 

NUMBER OF ALIEN IMMIGRANTS ADMITTED YEARLY 

1913 1,197,892 

1914 1,218,480 

1915 326,700 

1916 298,826 

1917 295,403 

1918 I10,6l8 

1919 ••• 141,132 

1920 430,OOI 

1921 805,228 

1922 355,825 2 

Equally important with the increase in numbers is the change 
in the character of the immigrants who have been entering our 
country. About 1880 the character of immigrants changed in a 
very remarkable manner. Immigration from the north and west 
of Europe began declining abruptly and was replaced by an in- 
flow of alien peoples from the south and east of Europe. This 
flow of people from southern Europe soon developed into a great 
stream. 

1 The National Education Association. The Towner-Sterling Bill. p. 34-7. 

2 Number fixed by immigration law of 1921. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 35 

Practically no Italians came to us before 1870, whereas in the 
five-year period beginning 1906, 1,186,000 arrived from that coun- 
try alone. 1 In the decade between 1900 and 1910 there was a loss 
of 275,911 in the number of people coming from northwestern 
Europe, and an increase of 3,215,689 from southern and eastern 
Europe. 

Neiv Type of Immigrant Magnifies Problem 

This enormous influx from countries in which little education 
exists and in which social and political ideals are so radically dif- 
ferent from our own, gives a new significance to the ever-in- 
creasing number of aliens in our midst. The seriousness of the 
double problem created both by the increase in numbers and the 
change in character of our immigrants has been recognized by 
Congress, which in May, 1921, passed "An act to limit immi- 
gration of aliens into the United States." This act is described 
in the 1921 annual report of the Commissioner General of Immi- 
gration as "the first strictly immigration law which provides for 
actual limiting the number of aliens . . . admitted to the United 
States." This act brings with it a radical departure from our 
former immigration policy and yet it still allows 356,000 immi- 
grants to enter our country each year, 153,000 of which may come 
from southern and eastern Europe. If this act had come twenty 
years ago, the country would not face the problem presented by 
the great mass of unassimilated southern and eastern European 
aliens within our borders at the present time. The door has 
been closed too late, however, and millions of these people are 
already with us and most of them are here to stay. 

The percentage of illiteracy among the foreign-born is high, 
and the number of foreign-born illiterates within our borders has 
been rapidly increasing, as the accompanying table shows. 

NUMBER OF ILLITERATE FOREIGN-BORN IN THE UNITED STATES 

1900 1,287,135 

I9IO I,650,36l 

1920 1,763,740 

In 1920 there were 1,500,000 people over ten years of age in 
the country who were unable to speak English. The number of 
illiterates and non-English-speaking aliens, however, is only a 
partial measure of the need for Americanization. One may be 
able to speak English sufficiently to pass the census enumerator, 

1 See Cubberley, Public Education in the United States, p. 337. 



36 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

and yet not have that degree of literacy which means ability to 
comprehend the fundamental principles of our government. To 
understand and speak English is but a step in making it possible 
for the immigrant to participate in the conduct of our national 
affairs. 

Many Native-Born Need Americanization 

Nor is the need for Americanization limited to the foreign- 
born. The war brought home, for the first time to the average 
American citizen, the fact that foreign settlements, described as 
"alien islands," exist in various parts of our country. They are 
found both in the urban and rural sections. These people are 
often wholly out of sympathy with American ideals, but are not 
classed as aliens in any federal census, because often they are 
removed two or three generations from the original immigrants. 
In 1920 there were 16,784,299 people in the United States, one or 
both of whose parents were foreign-born. Millions of these con- 
stitute a problem of Americanization even more grave than that 
presented by the immigrant. Being native-born, they have the 
right of the ballot, and yet many of them attend foreign-language 
schools and retain the language and ideals of the country from 
which their parents or grandparents came. The problem that 
these un-American native Americans presented by their "hypen- 
ated" activities during the war is still fresh in the minds of all 
well-informed Americans. That problem is no less serious today 
than it was during the war — only less apparent. Millions of 
people wholly uninformed and out of symapthy with American 
ideals are living in our country. Such a menace cannot be safely 
disregarded in peaceful times. We must not wait until in some 
National crisis this great mass of unassimilated citizenry turns 
the balance in the direction of disorder and anarchy. A recent 
report on Americanization compiled by the Chamber of Com- 
merce of the United States sums up the situation in the following 
words : 

It may truly be said that one result of the war was to brim? 
home of the American people as a whole the importance of 
assimilating new-comers to this country. War-time investiga- 
tions revealed a condition which but few outside of our social 
and civic agencies had realized, such as the existence of groups 
or colonies of unassimilated immigrants, unable to speak the 
language of their adopted country, and almost totally ignorant 
of its manners, customs and political and civic institutions. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 37 

Thus, we see that the Americanization problem is one result- 
ing from the presence in the country of millions of both foreign- 
and native-born people, unassimilated so far as our language, 
ideals and customs are concerned. 



MILLIONS TAUGHT BY UNQUALIFIED 
TEACHERS r 

Of the twenty million boys and girls in the public schools 
during the war, it was conservatively estimated that — 

One million are being taught by teachers whose education 
has been limited to seven or eight years in the elementary 
schools ; 

Seven million are being taught by teachers who are scarcely 
more than boys and girls themselves, and whose appreciation of 
their responsibilities must, in consequence of their youth and 
inexperience, be extremely slight; 

Ten million are being taught by teachers who have had no 
special preparation for their work and whose general education 
is quite inadequate. 

The seriousness of the shortage of teachers at the opening 
of the school year 1920 was revealed by investigations of the 
National Education Association. 2 

The Bureau of Education also issued a report showing that 
the shortage of teachers was alarming. On the basis of these 
studies it was estimated that there were approximately eighteen 
thousand classrooms for which teachers could not be found, and 
that there were four hundred and fifty thousand boys and girls, 
in one school year, to whom school privileges were denied. So 
much for conditions existing during the war. 

Since the war a number of surveys have been made which 
furnish data concerning the preparation of teachers. A survey 
of Kentucky for the year 1921, shows that "only one elementary 
teacher in ten is satisfactorily prepared to teach in the elementary 
school ... 23 per cent have never gone beyond the elementary 
school." 3 

1 National Education Association. The Towner-Sterling Bill. p. 47-9- 

2 See Report by Hugh S. Magill in N. E. A. Bulletin. November, 1920. 
p. 15-16. 

3 Public Education in Kentucky. General Education Board, p. 53. 



38 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

A more comprehensive study, the results of which are given 
in a table below, gives an estimate of the teacher training 
situation in twenty-eight of the states in the country. 

PREPARATION OF TEACHERS 1 

Per cent Per cent Per cent 

less than high 2 years 

high school college or 

school education normal 

training or more school 

STATES 

Alabama 59 41 10 

Arizona o 100 89 

Arkansas 87 13 12 

California o 100 86 

Connecticut o 100 90 

Florida 94 6 1 

Iowa o 100 30 

Idaho o 100 42 

Kansas 26 74 42 

Louisiana 15 85 67 

Massachusetts 7 99 86 

Mississippi 76 24 4 

Missouri 30 70 34 

Montana 23 77 34 

Nebraska 39 61 4 

New Mexico 73 27 18 

New York o 100 82 

North Carolina . . 51 49 23 

Ohio 8 92 42 

Oklahoma 73 27 22 

Oregon o 100 79 

Pennsylvania 23 77 67 

South Carolina 40 60 35 

South Dakota 39 61 34 

Utah o 100 69 

Vermont 6 94 29 

Washington o 100 50 

West Virginia 67 33 18 

A few of the outstanding facts brought out by this table 
follow : 

1. Only nine of the twenty-eight states listed have no 
teachers who have had less than a high-school education. 

2. In eight states of the Union over 50 per cent of the 

1 School and Society. March 18, 1922. p. 304. 

(Ed. Note. — First item after Massachusetts should probably be "1 per 
cent..") 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 39 

teachers have had less than a high-school education ; in Florida 
94 per cent have had less than a high school education. 

3. In eighteen of the twenty-eight states less than one-half 
of the teachers have had a normal-school education. 

It is not necessary to give further data in support of the 
generally recognized fact that the composition of the teaching- 
population of the country is below the standard that our Nation 
should expect as to maturity, experience, and training. 

Present indications are not encouraging in indicating any 
great improvement in the personnel of the teachers of the coun- 
try in the immediate future. A recent report has shown that 
in spite of the "large increases in salaries given the teachers 
in the school years ending 1919 and 1920 that they are in a 
less advantageous economic position than at any other time since 
the civil war period." * 

Even in the cities, where the salary increases have been the 
greatest, teachers' salaries have barely held their own against 
the increased cost of living. 2 

In the rural communities the salaries of teachers are still 
pitifully inadequate. Data based upon a recent salary inquiry 
sent to all rural communities of the country by the Bureau of 
Education, furnish evidence for the following statements : 

1. Seventeen thousand teachers were reported as receiving 
annual salaries less than $500. 

2. Approximately forty thousand teachers would have been 
reported as receiving less than $500 annual salary, if all rural 
communities had replied and their returns had been similar to 
those actually received. 

3. In ten states from 25 to 64 per cent of the teachers in 
rural communities receive salaries of less than $500 annually, 
and hundreds of teachers received an annual salary of less 
than $300. 

Under such conditions it is unlikely that there will be a great 
increase in the number of men and women desiring to enter 
the teaching profession, or that the standard of their preparation 
will be appreciably raised. In fact there is some evidence to 
show that the standard of preparation is lower now than during 
the war. A recent study of the preparation of high-school 

1 Trends of School Costs. Russell Sage Foundation, p. 64. 

2 Have Teachers' Salaries Been Increased? Journal of the National 
Education Association. April, 1922. p. 172. 



4 o THE REFERENCE SHELF 

teachers, who receive the best salaries of any of our public- 
school teachers, shows that the proportion of high-school teach- 
ers who were graduates of colleges in the school year ending 
1921 was lower in every state in the Union except four, than 
it was in the school year ending 1918. 1 

In the school year 1917-18, before the effects of the war 
upon our normal-school enrolment had been serious, there were 
approximately twenty-five thousand graduates from the normal 
schools of the United States each year. 2 During the war there 
was a great decrease in the number of normal-school graduates. 
Only recently has the number of normal-school attendants re- 
turned to that of the pre-war figure. There is a very remote 
prospect that the number of normal-school graduates will, under 
present conditions, ever be anywhere near the demand for new 
teachers that comes every year. 

The Federal Commissioner of Education estimated that the 
number of recruits needed in the rural schools of the country 
alone, for the year 1918-19, was one hundred and thirty thou- 
sand. It will be seen, therefore, that the number of normal- 
school graduates was but a small fraction of the number of 
new teachers needed every year. The Federal Commissioner of 
Education estimates that there was an annual turnover of more 
than one in three. If this holds true for 1921-22, it means that 
for the coming school year over two hundred thousand new 
teachers will be needed. Our teacher-training institutions will 
graduate less than a fourth of this number. 



EQUALIZING EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY- 

Abraham Lincoln expressed the hope that the time would 
come when our country would "guarantee to all an unfettered 
start and a fair chance in the race of life." How far we have 
fallen short in attaining this great ideal is familiar to all who 
are acquainted with the facts concerning the educational situa- 
tion in the country. 

The accompanying table shows the percentage of illiteracy, 

1 The Journal of the National Education Association. April, 1922. 
p. 170. 

2 Statistics of Normal Schools. 1917-18. United States Bureau of 
Education Bulletin. No. 81. 1919. 

3 National Education Association. The Towner-Sterling Bill. p. 51-6. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 



4i 



divided as to rural or urban residence, in nine states selected 
to represent each geographic section of the country. 



PERCENTAGE OF ILLITERATES IN RURAL AND URBAN 
COMMUNITIES — 1920 CENSUS 





Native white 




Negro 






Percentage 


illiterate 


Percentage illiterate 








Ratio, 






Ratio, 








rural 






rural 


State 


Rural Urban to urban 


Rural 


Urban 


to urban 


Rhode Island 


2.4 


.6 


4 to 1 


11.8 


10.2 


1.1 to 1 


New Jersey 


1.2 


3 


4 to 1 


9.1 


5-4 


1.7 to 1 


Wisconsin . . . 


■9 


•3 


3 to 1 


4.1 


4.1 


1. to 1 


Missouri .... 


2.9 


•7 


4.1 to 1 


20.6 


9-6 


2.1 to 1 


Florida 


4.1 


•7 


5.8 to 1 


27.4 


12.3 


2.2 to 1 


Kentucky . . . 


8.6 


1.9 


4-5 to 1 


230 


18.9 


1.2 to 1 


Louisiana . . . 


16.3 


2.0 


8.1 to 1 


45-4 


22.1 


2.1 to 1 


Colorado .... 


2.1 


.6 


3-3 to 1 


10.0 


5-5 


1.8 to 1 


California . . . 


•7 


.2 


3 to 1 


8.6 


4.2 


2.0 to 1 



This table shows that illiteracy among our native-born popu- 
lation is from 2 to 8 times as great in the rural as in the urban 
communities. In the state of Louisiana, for example, among 
the white population, illiteracy is 8 times as frequent in rural 
as in urban communities. Considering negroes, in the same 
state, there is twice as large a percentage of illiterates in the 
rural communities as in the urban. It is plain, therefore, that 
the illiteracy of the more than three million native-born residents 
of the United States, is primarily a rural problem, or more 
exactly, a rural school problem. Over 60 per cent of our 
illiterates are native-born, and over 80 per cent of our illiterate 
native population are found in rural communities. The in- 
equalities in our educational system represented by our ineffec- 
tive rural schools may, therefore, be held principally responsible 
for the existence of our present illiteracy problem. 

Many Children Deprived of Educational Opportunities 

The children of many states do not have an equal opportu- 
nity to acquire that most elemental educational attainment, the 
ability to read and write. Whether a child is to reach maturity 
possessing this fundamental educational attainment is in many 
states largely a matter of chance. If he happens to be reared 
in a rural community, his chance of being an illiterate is, in 



42 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

some states, eight times as great as if he lived in a city during 
childhood. 

The length of the school term maintained in the different 
local communities of any state is another good indication as to 
how near that state comes to providing equal educational op- 
portunities for its children. It is obvious that any educational 
opportunity is dependent upon keeping the schools in session. 

The table below shows the inequalities in the length of 
school terms maintained in different counties of Colorado as 
revealed by a recent study : 

LENGTH OF SCHOOL TERM — COLORADO COUNTIES * 

Name of county School term in clays 

Crowley 167 

Cheyenne 151 

Pueblo 141 

Montezuma 133 

Baca g8 

Similar data are given for Virginia : 

SCHOOL TERMS IN VIRGINIA — NON-CITY SCHOOLS 2 

Length of school term Number of schools 

in months maintaining term 

5 or less 65 

6 226 

7 226 

8 148 

9 36 

Over 9 7 

Total 748 

Conditions recently found in Kentucky are well summed up 
in the following quotation taken from a survey of Kentucky 
Schools, completed in 1921 : 

. . . the actual rural school term is approximately 113 days. 
This inadequate school term places rural children at a great dis- 
advantage as compared with their less numerous contemporaries 
in city and graded districts. For example, in the graded and 
city school districts children have, as a rule, during the eight 

1 Common School Finance in Colorado, and Certain Inferences of Na- 
tional Import. F. H. Swift. Journal of Educational Research. November, 
1920. p. 746. 

2 Virginia Public Schools. Report of Virginia Education Survey Staff, 
p. 293. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 43 

years of the elementary course a total of 72 months of school- 
ing, whereas rural children have ordinarily only 48 months. 
Working under this handicap, county children must either do 
one-third more work in a given period than graded and city 
school children, or take twelve instead of eight years to com- 
plete the elementary school program. Few rural children are 
able to remain in school so long, and few are able to do more 
in a given period than their graded school and city cousins. 
The result is that rural school children actually receiving on 
the average even less than two-thirds as much elementary edu- 
cation as graded and city school children.^ (Italics ours.) 

Striking Inequalities Within States 

Variations in the quality of teachers provided in different 
communities of the same state are similarly striking. In 
Massachusetts, to select a state in which the support of the 
schools is provided principally by the local community, in the 
present school year the following inequalities exist in the com- 
pensation of teachers : 

MASSACHUSETTS' AVERAGE TEACHERS' SALARIES 2 

Population of community Average annual salary 

Over 100,000 $1,589 

Villages and towns 1,126 

One-teacher rural schools 391 

It must be considered that the child taught by a teacher who 
can be obtained for an annual salary of $391 is not receiving 
an opportunity equal to that received by the child taught by a 
teacher paid an annual salary of $1,589. Similar inequalities, 
greater or less, exist in every state in the Union in 1921-22. 3 

Equality of Opportunity Denied 

The conditions revealed by these tables indicate that equality 

of educational opportunity is a myth in many states. But in 

all these states at least some schooling is offered. The quotation 

given below for Arkansas shows that in that state no schooling 

whatsoever is being offered the children in many communities. 

In 1920, 120 Arkansas school districts levied no school tax 
at all. In 1921 something over 70 pursued the same policy. 
The average school year per county varied all the way from 

1 Public Education in Kentucky. Report of Kentucky Educational Com- 
mission, p. 87-8. 

2 Journal of National Education Association. May, 1922. p. 216. 

3 Ibid. p. 216. 



44 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

8 to 3 months. Needless to say that multitudes of schools in 
the counties whose average was 3 months maintained schools 
for one month and many schools were not opened at all. In 
the best communities in Arkansas, schools frequently would 
close in December except for the fact that they were main- 
tained by the proceeds of private subscriptions and tuition fees. 
There are in Arkansas, eleven cities of 10,000 and over. In 
reply to an inquiry sent out in November, 1921, four of these 
eleven cities reported that their schools were in debt for main- 
tenance the equivalent of one year's income or more. Six of 
the eleven replied that they charged tuition or raised money by 
other unusual means. 1 

These data are sufficient to show that children of the United 
States are not given even approximately equal educational op- 
portunities. If there is no equality in such fundamental pro- 
visions as have been dealt with above, there can be no equality 
in less essential educational provisions. 

There is a fundamental cause back of practically every illus- 
tration of the lack of equality of educational opportunity found 
within a state. This is the lack of a sound basis of finance for 
our state public schools. In 1920, 78 per cent of the income 
for our public schools came from purely local sources. 2 Further- 
more, the percentage of school expenditures coming from local 
sources has been steadily increasing. 

Schools Supported Principally by Local Communities 

Consequently in most states our schools are supported prin- 
cipally by the local community. Whether a school will be well 
supported is fundamentally dependent upon the ability of the 
local community to support it. That different communities vary 
enormously in ability to support their schools has been shown 
by numerous studies. Below is given the result of a recent study 
made in Indiana :" 

There is the sum of $22,086 of taxable property in one 
county for each person enumerated for school purposes as 
against $1,873 hi another county, or $11.70 of taxables in the 
former county per each child enumerated for school purposes 
as against $1 in the latter county. 

There is such an unequal distribution of wealth i:i Indiana 

1 Professor Fletcher Harper Swift. University of Minnesota, quoted 
from communication to National Education Association. April 20, 1922. 

2 Based on figures furnished by United States Bureau of Education, 
(manuscript not yet printed). 

3 What Ts Needed to Advance Indiana's School System from 17th to 
1st Place. Pamphlet issued by Indiana Educational Campaign Committee. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 45 

that some corporations are able to maintain their schools with 
a local tuition tax of 5 cents on each $100 of taxables, while 
other townships cannot maintain their schools the minimum 
term upon a local tuition tax of 75 cents, the legal maximum. 
This condition requires one citizen of Indiana to bear a tax 
burden fifteen times greater than that borne by another Indiana 
citizen for the education of his children. 

It is little wonder under such a situation that the following 
conditions exist in this same state :* 

The school term in a few Indiana counties is nine months; 
in some others it is eight months ; in most others seven months ; 
in many others six months ; while in some townships it has been 
less than one hundred twenty days. 

There are thousands of Indiana boys and girls not within 
reasonable reach of a standard high school. Because of the 
financial conditions of their parents, poor conditition of roads 
and streams, and the scarcity of high schools in their counties, 
many of them may never hope to obtain a high school education, 
while in other counties there is a high school within easy reach 
of every pupil so that he can attend school and remain at home 
with his parents. 

Is it any wonder that 90 per cent of the eighth grade gradu- 
ates in some counties enter the high school as against 18 per 
cent of the eighth grade graduates in other counties? 

Another recent study made in Iowa shows that one city in 
order to support its schools must levy a tax of $15.08 on each 
$1,000, whereas another city in this state supports its schools on 
a tax of $1.30 on each $1,000 of taxable property. We also find 
that some cities in Iowa are spending as high as $125.80 a year 
for each pupil, whereas others spend as little as $37.95. 

Similar conditions revealed by a study in Pennsylvania are 
given below : 

Amount of Money Behind Each Child for School Purpose — 
six pennsylvania counties ' 

County 

Fulton $1,260 

Sullivan 2,010 

Clearfield 2,110 

Lancaster 5, 190 

Northampton 5,3 2 o 

Delaware 7,650 

1 Ibid. 

2 The Nation and the Schools. Keith and Bagley. p. 255. 



46 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

Some counties in Pennsylvania have over six times as much 
wealth to tax for school purposes as other counties according 
to this table. Similar inequalities between towns and districts 
within the same county may be found in Pennsylvania, with 
the resulting inequalities in the educational opportunity offered. 1 

So long as such conditions exist there will never be equality 
of educational opportunities offered the children of the Nation. 
That there is no equality in educational opportunity is a matter 
of national concern. The Nation is the sufferer in a very real 
sense. Children reaching maturity illiterate, and otherwise in- 
adequately educated, cannot but be a handicap to the progress 
of the Nation. The situation is even more deserving of atten- 
tion since under present conditions there is little hope of im- 
provement. The part of the financial burden of supporting the 
schools that is being placed upon the purely local communities, 
as opposed to the county and state, is increasing. The table 
below shows this clearly: 

Per cent of school revenue ~ 
Year from local taxes 

1890 68 

1900 67 

1910 72 

1918 78 

1920 78 

The provision of equal educational opportunities is fundament- 
ally dependent on placing a smaller and smaller financial re- 
sponsibility upon the local community within the state. Any 
means that will encourage the states to equalize educational 
opportunities within their borders should be welcomed. 



THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES INVOLVED 3 

A discussion of the provisions of the Towner-Sterling Bill 
involves the consideration of the following questions : 

1. Should the Federal Government increase the effective 
operation of its existing educational activities by unifying them 

1 Ibid. p. 259. 

2 Statistics of State School Systems, 1917-18. United States Bureau 
of Education Bulletin. No. 11. p. 54. 1920. 

3 National Education Association. The Towner Sterling Bill. p. 5-9. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 47 

in a Department of Education under a Secretary of Education, 
and thereby give new sanction and recognized leadership to 
American public education? 

2. Should the Federal Government extend the established 
principles of federal aid to the states for the promotion of 
education to encourage and assist the states to remedy certain 
recognized educational defects existing quite generally through- 
out the country? 

3. Should the conduct and management of public education 
remain exclusively under state control? 

The supporters of the bill believe that wise public policy 
demands that each of these three questions should be answered 
in the affirmative. 

Opposition Based on False Assumptions 

Those who have opposed the creation of a Department of 
Education and further participation of the Federal Government 
in the promotion of public education base their objections 
primarily on the assumption that such participation means fed- 
eral control of education within the states. They will not con- 
cede that the National Government can cooperate with the states 
in promoting an interest of the highest importance to both state 
and nation. They refuse to recognize that such cooperation has 
been carried on, and is now being carried on successfully. They 
declare that those who favor the establishment of a Depart- 
ment of Education, and the extension of the principle of federal 
aid to the states for the promotion of education, would transfer 
the responsibility for the support and control of public education 
from the state and local communities within the state, to the 
Federal Government, and place the school systems of all the 
states under a vicious bureaucratic control. 

We maintain that these assumptions are without foundation. 
They can be maintained only by imputing motives that do not 
exist to those who favor extension of federal participation in 
the promotion of education, and by refusing to give proper con- 
sideration to past experiences and to constitutional and statutory 
provisions prohibiting federal control. 

Constitution Forbids Federal Control 

It is conceded that our Federal Government can exercise 
only such powers as are delegated to it by the United States 



48 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

Constitution or clearly implied therein ; that the Constitution 
does not give to the Federal Government or to Congress the 
control or management of public education within the states ; 
and that the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution expressly 
provides that "The powers not delegated to the United States 
by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are 
reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." The recent 
decision of the Supreme Court declaring invalid the Child Labor 
Law gives added emphasis to this provision of the Constitution. 
Those who favor the extension of federal participation in edu- 
cation clearly recognize these facts. The proposed measure 
which they advocate would embody in statute law the clearest 
possible declaration of the authority of the states to manage 
and control their public school systems. 

Why Such Unreasonable Assertions 

Under these conditions it is difficult to understand why the 
opponents of the further participation of the Federal Govern- 
ment in the promotion of education should persist in declaring 
that such participation will mean "a great bureaucratic machine 
at Washington, with three-quarters of a million of federal em- 
ployees teaching in the schools and bossed by several thousand 
field inspectors, supervisors, and other petty traveling officials." 
We insist that such assumptions and imaginings are absolutely 
unjustified. Starting with a false hypothesis and basing their 
arguments on false assumptions, they would lead us to believe 
that those who favor federal promotion of education would 
either ignorantly or wilfully bring about conditions disastrous 
to our free institutions. 

Extent and Character of Support 

We find earnestly supporting this proposition to establish 
a Department of Education and extend the principle of federal 
aid for the promotion of education, an overwhelming majority 
of these engaged in the work of public education — state super- 
intendents, county superintendents, normal school presidents, 
city superintendents, and classroom teachers throughout the 
country. It is also earnestly supported by many national organi- 
zations that are friends of public education. Among these 
organizations may be named the National Education Association, 
which represents the professional organization of the educators 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 49 

of the country, and which has repeatedly endorsed this proposi- 
tion. Among the women's organizations actively supporting it 
are the General Federation of Women's Clubs, the National 
League of Women Voters, the Daughters of the American 
Revolution, the National Congress of Mothers and Parent- 
Teachers Associations, the National Council of Jewish Women, 
the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union, and the 
Woman's Relief Corps. The proposition also has the unqualified 
support of the American Federation of Labor. Great religious 
forces such as the International Sunday School Council of 
Religious Education have given the proposition their endorse- 
ment, and it is also supported by a number of fraternal organi- 
zations that are particularly friendly to the promotion of public 
education, among which may be named the Supreme Council 
of Scottish Rite Masonry for the Southern Jurisdiction of the 
United States. Finally, the National Committee for a Depart- 
ment of Education, made up of a number of leading public- 
spirited citizens, representing various professional and business 
interests, is given effective support to the cause. 

Forces Opposing the Proposition 

To say that the officers and members of these great organi- 
zations would violate the Constitution of the United States and 
either ignorantly or deliberately bring about federal bureau- 
cratic control of education within the states, is an attempt on 
the part of ,a few to indict the motives and the judgment of 
millions of intelligent patriotic citizens. It is only fair that 
attention be called to the forces which are opposing the proposi- 
tion to further extend federal aid for the promotion of edu- 
cation. We find this opposition comes primarily from the 
representatives of private and parochial schools, and a few great 
privately endowed institutions. We believe it may truthfully be 
said that the proposition is quite generally supported by those 
who are interested primarily in public education, and are essen- 
tially public-school minded, and opposed by a limited number of 
those who represent privately supported and privately endowed 
institutions. It is significant, however, that the departments of 
education in privately endowed universities, which are in touch 
with the problems of public education, generally support the 
proposition. 



50 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

Opposition Pictures Tyranny of Free Government 

It is astonishing to note the extremes to which the opponents 
of this proposition have gone in undertaking to picture in their 
imagination the dire consequences which will follow the further 
participation of the Federal Government in the promotion of 
education. They would frighten us into thinking that federal 
participation means federal control, and that federal control 
must end in the destruction of our liberties. In frantic appeal 
we are called upon as American citizens to save ourselves from 
the tyranny and usurpation of our own government, which, we 
are warned, is developing conditions "that will put to shame 
the best efforts of the government of the Czar of all the Russias 
when in the heyday of its glory." A tyranny worse than that 
of the Czar! A terrible indictment, if it were true. But we 
still have faith in our National Government and refuse to be 
frightened by this terrible warning of impending tyranny. We 
have confidence that our Nation will continue to be what it has 
been from the beginning, a government of the people and by 
the people ; and since it is the people's own government, the 
people may well have greater faith in its leadership than in 
leadership furnished by private institutions, endowed and sup- 
ported by great private interests. 

Opponents Set Up Autocratic Secretary 

Those who oppose the creation of a Department of Educa- 
tion with a Secretary in the President's Cabinet would continue 
their policy of frightfulness by picturing in their wild flights 
of imagination the horrible spectacle of a Secretary of Edu- 
cation, actuated by base political motives, corrupting the youth 
of the country through such wicked influences as he might be 
able to exert through the school systems of the several states. 
Such assumptions are too ridiculous to impress any serious- 
minded person. Any President might reasonably be expected 
to be particularly careful in the selection of a Secretary of 
Education. The occupant of this position of great responsibility 
must stand out prominently before the people, his every act 
and recommendation subject to public analysis and criticism. 
To begin to do some of the things that have been suggested 
he might do, would bring instant and general rebuke from the 
people, without regard to political affiliations. As one United 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 51 

States Senator remarked, "To undertake to play politics in this 
position would be the poorest kind of politics." But why should 
anyone impune the motives of a Secretary of Education in 
advance? Is it any more just or reasonable than to condemn 
in advance the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of 
Commerce? To refuse to establish leadership and delegate 
authority because of such imaginary fears would make impos- 
sible the realization of the highest purposes of free government. 

No One Advocating Federal Control 

Who is advocating federal control of education? Certainly 
not those who are supporting the proposition to establish a 
Department of Education and extend the established principle 
of federal aid for the promotion of education. They are the 
ones who are most strongly opposed to federal control of edu- 
cation within the states. What they seek is federal aid and 
cooperation with the states in developing a stronger, better 
trained, more intelligent American citizenship. Is it reasonable 
to suppose that state superintendents would wish to turn over 
to the Federal Government their rights and prerogatives? And 
yet state superintendents favor this proposition because they 
recognize the advantages which have come from federal co- 
operation with the states in the past, and the still greater ad- 
vantage which will be derived from the further extension of 
this principle. 

Proposition Based on Established Principles 

There is nothing new in this proposition. It has been thor- 
oughly tried out and found absolutely sound in principle and 
practice. Other departments have been established to cooperate 
with the states in promoting interests of national importance. 
The Department of Agriculture was created in response to a 
demand from the agricultural interests of the country, not to 
control agriculture but for the promotion of agriculture, and 
the benefits which have resulted therefrom are apparent. The 
Department of Labor was created at the request of the labor 
interests of the country, not to control labor but to promote 
the interests of labor, and so one can show that federal dom- 
ination has followed. The Department of Commerce was 
created at the request of the commercial interests of the country 
for the promotion of commerce. The good which this depart- 



52 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

merit has accomplished is well known. Why deny to public 
education for its welfare and promotion a similar recognition? 

Many Precedents for Federal Aid 

The Federal Government has cooperated with the states in 
the promotion of education from the founding of our Nation. 
Common schools have been promoted by grants of land and 
money from the Federal Government. Colleges of agriculture 
and mechanic arts were founded by land-grants given by the 
Federal Government and are today aided by grants of money 
from the federal treasury. Agricultural education is encouraged 
and promoted by the cooperation of the Federal Government 
with the states under the Smith-Lever Act, and vocational edu- 
cation is similarly promoted under the Smith-Hughes Act. 

Causes of Friction Eliminated 

Any friction that has arisen in the administration of these 
acts has come from the fact that they authorize too much 
detailed supervision. These defects have been remedied in the 
Towner-Sterling Bill under which it is proposed to extend the 
principle of federal aid. While there is preserved to the Federal 
Government the unquestioned right to audit the expenditure of 
such funds as may be apportioned to the state for the specific 
purposes named, and while certain general and very reasonable 
statutory requirements are set up which must be complied with 
by the states in order to receive the Federal grants, all details 
of organization, supervision and control are reserved to the 
states, to be carried on under state law by the state and local 
educational authorities of the several states. 



REPORT OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON 
EDUCATION i 

Analysis and General Considerations 

The bill creates a Department of Education with a secretary 
at its head, who shall be a member of the President's Cabinet. 
The first six sections of the bill provide for the organization of 
this department. There are many reasons why this should be 

1 House of Representatives Report No. 1201, 66th Congress, 3d session, 
p. 7-12. January 17, 1921. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 53 

done. It is generally admitted that the education of its citizens 
is the most important work in which a government can engage. 
This is especially true in a republic. A nation can be properly 
governed only when it is intelligently governed. While the 
United States is more dependent than almost any other nation 
upon education for the successful conduct of its government, 
it is about the only nation in the world that has not given 
education primary recognition, for nearly all the other nations 
have departments or ministries of education with their heads 
members of the Cabinet. 

Early in our history we began making appropriations to the 
states in lands and money for educational purposes. We have 
undertaken the work both directly and indirectly. There are 
now thirty or more different parts of the government service 
doing educational work, and we are annually making large 
appropriations from the national treasury for their support. 
Yet the only recognition we have given education at the seat 
of government is the establishment of a small bureau in the 
Department of the Interior. There is no coordination of the 
various educational activities of the government. There is no 
head to direct the work. The Commissioner of Education has 
no authority over the educational work of the government out- 
side his own bureau, which has but a subordinate place, sup- 
ported by only small appropriations. To concentrate and co- 
ordinate this work will make both for efficiency and economy. 
To give to education the recognition in the federal system which 
its importance merits is one of the principal objects of the 
bill. 

Aid From the Federal Treasury 

The remaining sections of the bill provide for the authori- 
zations of appropriations from the federal treasury to aid and 
encourage the states in particular branches of educational work 
which are especially urgent. These authorizations for appro- 
priations are made contingent upon the states appropriating an 
amount at least equally as large for the same purpose. The 
particular branches of educational work to be thus aided and 
encouraged are the removal of illiteracy, the Americanization 
of immigrants, the equalization of educational opportunities, 
the promotion of physical education, and the preparation of 
teachers. 



54 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

Illiteracy 

The extent of illiteracy in the United States is so great as 
to amount not only to a national disgrace but a national 
menace as well. According to the census of 1910, there were 
in the United States 5,500,000 persons ten years of age and over 
who could not read or write any language. In addition there 
were 3,500,000 who could not speak, read, or write English. 
These statistics put us in ninth place among the nations, with 
most of the civilized world ahead of us. The disclosures of the 
last census as to illiteracy are not yet available, but it is 
believed that the percentage of illiteracy has not been substan- 
tially reduced since 1910. 

Our alarming condition was graphically disclosed by the 
examination of the draft registrants during the late war. The 
Surgeon General's report showed that of the men called to 
service between the ages of twenty-one and thirty-one nearly 
25 per cent were practically illiterate. The Nation's defense is 
thus doubly impaired. First, because one-fourth of the sons 
of America called to serve are incapacitated for efficient service 
by being so ignorant and illiterate that they cannot even under- 
stand the orders given them; and, second, because in a free 
country its safety is jeopardized when its voters cannot read 
the ballots they cast and only know how to vote as they are 
told. 

The economic loss is tremendous. Secretary Lane estimated 
the annual loss to the Nation because of illiteracy alone at 
$825,000,000. The Director of the Bureau of Mines states that 
of the 1,000,000 men engaged in mining in the United States 
620,000 are foreigners, and that 460,000 of these cannot speak 
English. He states that the removal of illiteracy among the 
miners would save annually 1,000 lives and 150,000 injuries. 
Investigation has shown that one-half the industrial accidents 
are the result of ignorance, because the workers cannot read 
the danger warnings or understand the orders given. 

It has been said that illiteracy is a southern problem. The 
facts do not warrant that conclusion. Georgia has 389,000 
illiterates, but New York has 406,000. Alabama has 352,000, 
while Pennsylvania has 354,000. Louisiana has 352,000, Missis- 
sippi 200,000, and Texas has 282,000, but Illinois has 168,000, 
Ohio 124,000, and New Jersey 113,000. Even Massachusetts 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 55 

has 141,000, and undertakes to partially solve her illiteracy 
problem by depriving them of the right to vote. 

It is thought by many that illiteracy is a race question. But 
it is much more than that. There are over 1,000,000 more white 
illiterates in the United States than illiterate negroes. 

Americanization 

Closely allied with the problem of the removal of illiteracy 
is the Americanization of our foreign-born. We have now more 
than 15,000,000 foreign-born population in the United States. 
More than 5,000,000 cannot read or write the English language. 
M,ore than 2,000,000 cannot read or write any language. This 
mass of ignorance is not merely a negative evil; it has become 
and is now an active source of danger to the republic. Alien 
communities where our language is not spoken, where our 
magazines and newspapers are not read, and where no Amer- 
ican ideals or any understanding of our institutions are made 
known constitute a rich soil in which are sown the seeds of 
unrest and revolt. Alien agitators who advocate the destruction 
of our government, whose only purpose in coming to our shores 
is to excite revolution by violence, find here their opportunity. 
These revolutionists whom we have mistakenly allowed to come 
to this country easily win the confidence of their countrymen 
and easily lead them astray. Most of the difficulties among 
foreign workingmen have their origin in the evil work of these 
foreign malcontents and trouble makers. 

There is but one cure for these conditions, and that is to 
educate the immigrant to understand our language, our govern- 
ment, and our institutions. We are ourselves largely to blame. 
We admit the foreigner on easy terms and then let him shift 
for himself. We should surround him from the first with an 
atmosphere of helpful and patriotic influence. We should teach 
him to know what a free government is and what America 
really means. A man cannot love a country which he does not 
understand. He cannot appreciate and cherish institutions which 
are incomprehensible to him. 

' The task of the Americanization of immigrants, as well as 
that of the removal of illiteracy, is very largely an adult problem. 
The children we hope will be cared for in the schools. But 
there are few schools and few facilities of any kind for the 
education of grown men and women. That fact makes the 



56 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

problem more difficult, and accounts in part for the delay and 
reluctance of the states to meet the demand. But the difficulty 
must be faced. It is the duty of both the states and the Nation 
to meet it, and it is hoped that by an effective cooperation in 
the work we may be able within a few years to materially 
better the conditions that now exist. 

Equalising Educational Opportunities 

Provision is made for an appropriation to encourage the 
states to equalize educational opportunities for the youth of the 
land. That great inequalities exist within and among the states 
is well known. In the south a large proportion of the negro 
children never see the inside of a schoolhouse. In the north 
there is hardly a city that has adequate school facilities for all 
its children. In some rural communities and factory districts 
the value of the property is so small that local taxation cannot 
support the schools. In other sparsely settled communities 
means must be provided to carry pupils to central schools. The 
differences between the city and country schools are marked. 
On an average the country boy has two months less of a 
school year than the city boy. Through the eight grades this 
amounts to one year and four months' advantage given the city 
boy over the country boy. 

Unfortunately it is found that where the educational needs 
are greatest the schools are most inadequate. All over our land 
the poorest schools are in the poorest communities — just where 
the best schools are most needed. Through national cooperation 
with the states and the local communities these unfortunate 
conditions can be largely remedied. It should be the Nation's 
task to so encourage the states and cooperate with them that 
every child in America, whether born in a city or in a remote 
rural district, shall have the advantage of at least a common- 
school education. The idea is fundamentally sound that the 
Nation, the state, and the local community should share in the 
responsibility and the expense of supporting an adequate and 
equalized system of public education. 

Physical Education 

The Provost Marshal General's report revealed the startling 
fact that more than one-third of the men examined for military 
service in the late war were disqualified by reason of physical 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 57 

disability. It is also stated that 90 per cent of these hundreds 
of thousands of young men thus classed as physical defectives 
unfit for military service could have qualified had they been 
taught the application of the simplest rules of hygiene and 
health. It was ignorance, gross ignorance, that in the vast 
majority of cases was the cause of their incompetence. 

If one-third of our young men are diseased and unfit to 
fight for their country, they are unfit to make their full con- 
tribution to the life and progress of the Nation. They cannot 
bring to their families, to the community, or to the Nation a 
man's share of its obligation and service. In a double sense 
physical education is a national interest. Not only because a 
physical defective is a burden to the Nation, but because it is 
as necessary to have sound men as it is to have effective guns 
and ammunition for the Nation's defense. The addition to the 
dynamic power of the Nation, the strengthening of all the forces 
that make not only for national defense but for progress, even 
the increase of moral strength that would come from observance 
of the fundamental principles of healthful living, are incalcu- 
lable. 

There is but one adequate and sensible course to adopt and 
put into operation as part of our school curriculum, a system 
of physical education in its broadest and best sense. Unfortu- 
nately this has not been generally done. The additional cost 
deprives many schools and thousands of children of this 
essential element of education, with the unfortunate results 
already referred to. As the Nation has an immediate interest 
in the physical fitness of its citizens, it is only proper it should 
bear a part of the expense and do something toward stimulating 
the activity of the states in this regard. 

Preparation of Teachers 

It is generally admitted by those who have given thought to 
the subject that the most pressing educational problem in Amer- 
ica is how to overcome the difficulty of securing competent 
teachers for our schools. Thousands of schools are closed 
because teachers cannot be obtained. Tens of thousands of 
schools are taught by incompetent teachers. Over 100,000 
teachers now teaching American youth are less than twenty 
years old; 30,000 have no education beyond the eighth grade; 



58 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

200,000 have less than a high-school education ; 300,000 have no 
professional training whatever. 

The principal cause of this is that teachers have been paid 
less wages than almost any other class engaged in private or 
public service. The average salary paid teachers in the United 
States last year was $640. This is less than the wages paid scrub 
women or ditch diggers. It is only a fraction of the amount 
paid mechanics. It must be manifest that such conditions will 
drive all competent and self-respecting teachers from their work. 
It is certainly the duty of the people of the United States to 
bring up to at least a scale of reason and justice the salaries 
of the teachers of the country. 

But it is also the duty of the people to see that adequate 
means for the preparation of teachers be made available on 
such terms as will induce competent young men and women to 
engage in teaching. And this is not merely a local problem nor 
a state problem ; it is a national problem as well. It is un- 
doubtedly one of the principal duties of our schools to put into 
the minds and hearts of the youth of our land the principles 
of American liberty and justice and to teach them the blessings 
and the responsibility of American citizenship. Indifference as 
to the want of school privileges or as to the character of the 
schools and their teachers will inevitably result in the deteriora- 
tion of our citizenship and endanger the life of the Nation. It 
is to aid and encourage the states in the work of preparing 
competent teachers for all the schools within their borders, both 
public and private, that this provision is inserted in the bill. 

Objections 

It is urged that this bill provides for an undue extension 
of the powers of the general government ; that education is 
properly a state function and should not be invaded by the 
Nation. In reply to this objection it may be said that the 
legislation proposed does not usurp the powers of the states in 
their control of education. On the contrary, the control and 
management of the schools by state and local authorities is most 
carefully preserved, and very definite and positive provision is 
made against any interference on the part of the Federal Gov- 
ernment. It cannot be too strongly stated that this bill is to aid 
and encourage, and not to control. The bill instead of granting 
power to the Federal Government to control education within 
the states in the strongest possible provisions guards against it. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 59 

The Secretary of Education is denied the right to establish 
standards or to exercise any power over the conduct of the 
schools. The only standards or conditions which must be met 
by the states in order to receive the benefits provided are clearly 
stated in the bill. All details with respect to courses of study, 
plans, and methods are left entirely to the states. 

It cannot be said that national aid for education is a new 
proposition. As a matter of historic fact, the policy of making 
grants by the National Government for the education of the 
people antedates the adoption of the Constitution. The land act 
of 1785 provided for the survey of the Northwest Territory and 
set aside therein lot No. 16 in every township for "the main- 
tenance of public schools within said township." The ordinance 
of 1787 declared that "schools and the means of education shall 
forever be encouraged." In 1826 the section-grant provision 
was applied to the Louisiana purchase. In 1848, in the Oregon 
Territory land act, sections 16 and 36 were set aside for the 
public schools. Nor were grants of land only made by the 
general government. In 1818 the act admitting Illinois set aside 
the "5 per cent" funds for education. The surplus distributions 
were used largely for that purpose. In 1863 the Morrill Act 
providing for the establishment of the "land-grant colleges" in 
each state was signed by President Lincoln. This was strength- 
ened by the Hatch Act in 1887. The second Morrill Act, passed 
in 1890, gave $25,000 a year to each land-grant college. This 
was increased first to $30,000 and then to $80,000 a year in cash 
from the national treasury. The Smith-Lever Act of 1914 gave 
further increases for extension work and farmers' institutes. 
The Smith-Hughes Act of 1917, providing for assistance to the 
states for the promotion of vocational education, gives a total 
maximum appropriation from the National Government annually 
of $7,200,000 for that purpose. 

It is evident that the policy was early adopted and has been 
since maintained that the National Government shall, when 
national as well as state interests are involved, aid the states 
in the education of its citizens. 

The additional demand which will be made upon the treasury 
is urged as an objection. In the first place, it should be observed 
that the bill does not appropriate but merely authorizes appro- 
priations. It establishes a limit rather than creates a burden. 
It is within the discretion of Congress to appropriate the whole 
or any part within that limit in any year. Besides, it is not at 



60 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

all probable that the entire amount provided will ever be called 
for. To absorb the entire amount all the states would have to 
qualify under all the five separate provisions every year. It is not 
likely that this will ever occur. Some states will qualify for 
aid in the removal of illiteracy. Others will not need it. Some 
will qualify for the Americanization of immigrants. Others will 
not do so. And this is the case with each of the five provisions. 
The Federal Government will respond only when the state shall 
deem its own need in that particular matter of sufficient im- 
portance to make at least an equal appropriation. 

When Congress is to consider to which of the various de- 
mands for appropriations it will respond, it should make selec- 
tion of those which are of greatest importance and omit those 
which are least justifiable. There is nothing of more importance 
in our scheme of government than the education of the people. 
Whatever else may be left out, education cannot safely be 
excluded. If there is any one thing that justifies a tax in the 
judgment of American citizens, it is that which strengthens 
and supports our public schools. There are many millions now 
appropriated which have much less justification than the appro- 
priations called for under the terms of this bill. 

If education should be given the recognition which its im- 
portance requires, if illiteracy is a national peril, if ignorance 
of our language and institutions is a source of danger, if 
through the equalization of educational opportunities there 
should be guaranteed to every child in the land at least a com- 
mon-school education, if the conservation of the physical well- 
being of the youth of our land is imperative from the standpoint 
of national welfare, if there should be provided for every boy 
and girl in America a competent, well-qualified teacher in order 
that there may be developed throughout our Nation an intelligent 
and enlightened citizenship, then it can be fairly said that this 
legislation is justified. 



FEDERAL AID TO EDUCATION: ITS JUSTIFI- 
CATION, DEGREE AND METHOD 1 

The Cabinet was not created by the Constitution. It is an 
institution of government created solely by legislative enactment. 

1 By Congressman Horace M. Towner. University of Illinois Bulletin. 
Vol. 19. No. 23. p. 77-88. February 6, 1922. 



.THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 6i 

New executive departments are created and new members- of 
the Cabinet added whenever Congress considers it wise that such 
action should be taken. The first three of the ten now in exist- 
ence were established in Washington's administration, the last 
one was created in 1913. 

Departments are not created nor members of the Cabinet ap- 
pointed to control the subjects assigned them. If the general 
government has the Constitutional power to control the subject, 
such measure of control may be given the secretary as Congress 
deems advisable. For example, the general government is given 
control of military affairs and the Secretary of War is granted 
certain powers of control. The general government is given con- 
trol of postal affairs, and the Postmaster General is given large 
powers over such matters. The Constitution gives no power to 
the general government to control agriculture or labor. . Hence, 
the Secretary of Agriculture is charged with the duty of "pro- 
moting agriculture." He is not given power to control agricul- 
ture. The Secretary of Labor is charged with the duty of "fos- 
tering, promoting, and developing the welfare of the wage-earn- 
ers of the United States." He is given no power in any manner to 
control labor. In like manner, if a Department of Education is 
created, its secretary will be given no power to control education, 
'nit he may be charged with the duty of conducting studies and 
investigation in the field of education, he may call educational 
conferences, and encourage and aid the states in their educational 
work without exercising any measure of control. 

The justification for creating a Department of Education lies 
primarily in the fact that education is of supreme importance 
under our system of government, and should receive the recog- 
nition its importance merits. It has been a source of wonder to 
foreign observers of our institutions that the United States has 
so far failed to give education such recognition. It is almost 
alone among the nations in that respect. As reported by the 
Bureau of Efficiency, the National Government expended over 
$65,000,000 during the year 1920 for educational purposes. The 
educational activities thus carried on are scattered among the 
numerous bureaus, divisions, and commissions without any co- 
ordination and with numerous duplications of work. The Bureau 
of Education occupying a subordinate place in the Department 
of the Interior, and supported by only a small appropriation, has 
no control or even knowledge of these various activities. It is 
apparent that in order to secure efficiency and economy in the 



62 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

work already assumed of this character a directing and coordi- 
nating head is required. 

A Department is needed to coordinate and integrate the scat- 
tered educational forces among the states. It is proposed to create 
and organize a National Council of Education to consult and ad- 
vise with the Secretary of Education on subjects relating to the 
promotion and development of education throughout the nation. 
This council is to consist of the chief educational authority of 
each state ; twenty-five educators, representing different interests 
in education, and twenty-five eminent persons, not educators, in- 
terested in education from the standpoint of the public. Annual 
conferences are to be called, at which the entire scope of the 
educational interests of the nation will be considered. 

It is manifest that in order to carry on such work a Secretary 
of Education is required. Both in the councils of the Cabinet 
and in leadership and influence with the educational forces 
throughout the land, such an educational head is necessary to 
dignify and unify the educational work of the nation. This does 
not imply nor is it desired if it were possible to take from the 
states the control of their educational systems, nor does it mean 
the adoption of a national system of education. It is only to aid 
and encourage the states to greater educational endeavor, and by 
mutual conference and discussion to bring to the states most 
backward the stimulus that will raise their standards to the level 
of the more forward and advanced. 

It is believed that the creation of a Department of Education, 
with its chief a secretary in the President's Cabinet, will express 
for the first time in our history the nation's real interest in edu- 
cation ; that it will promote by research, investigation, and reports 
the practical operation of our public school system throughout 
the United States ; that it will by leadership and service stir the 
states and the people to a greater interest in educational work and 
to a more comprehensive knowledge of educational needs, and 
that it will mark the commencement of a new era of educational 
progress throughout the whole country. 

It is further proposed that provision shall be made to author- 
ize appropriations from the national treasury to encourage the 
states in the promotion and support of education. In order to 
do this effectively certain specific educational needs are consid- 
ered as being the most important and pressing. Thus appropri- 
ations are to be authorized to encourage the states for the 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 63 

removal of illiteracy, fur the Americanization of immigrants, for 
the preparation of teachers, to promote physical education, and 
to equalize educational opportunities. It is believed that this 
selection of objects covers in large measure the most pressing 
educational needs in which there is an immediate national in- 
terest. A state may accept the provisions of any one or more of 
the respective apportionments by meeting the prescribed require- 
ments and by providing for the expenditure from state or local 
funds of a sum at least equally as large as the national grant for 
the particular apportionment authorized. 

It is provided that these grants from the national treasury are 
not dependent upon executive discretion or favor, but are com- 
pulsory when the states meet the conditions specifically stated in 
the act. 

These requirements are minimum requirements, and there can 
be no reasonable dissent as to their necessity and fairness. The 
National Government cannot make a grant without stating the 
purpose for which the grant is made, and in making a contingent 
grant it must state specifically the conditions necessary to be met 
in order to secure the grant. On the other hand, the state is en- 
titled to know just what the requirements necessary to receive its 
part of the apportionment are, so that it can be assured that if it 
meets those requirements, and those only, it will not have to ap- 
peal for executive favor in order to receive its grant, and will, 
not be required to surrender control of its educational system 
to a centralized authority. 

It is said that the legislation is unnecessary. This objection is 
urged both against the creation of a Department of Education, 
and against the proposal to aid the states by subventions from 
the national treasury. There is always reluctance about creating 
a new department. Originally there were but three, State, Trea- 
sury, and War. An advisory attorney was selected, and after- 
ward he became a member of the Cabinet. Then came at inter- 
vals, Navy, Post Office, Interior, Agriculture, Commerce and 
Labor, and then separately, Labor. Now we have ten departments, 
and our Cabinet is one of the smallest among the nations. The 
purpose of the creation of all these executive departments was 
to give recognition to and secure a more effective realization of 
our primary and essential national interests. Because the Nation- 
al Government was not given control of education, and because 
the states have exercised that power does not disparage the fact 



6 4 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

that education has been throughout our history a primary, al- 
most a paramount interest of the Nation. In 1785 the National 
Government made grants of its public lands for the "maintenance 
of public schools." The Ordinance of 1787 creating the North- 
west Territory provided that "Schools and the means of educa- 
tion shall be forever encouraged." From that time down to the 
present the National Government has recognized education as an 
important interest of the Nation, and has aided it with grants 
both of land and money. If it has been and is a primary interest 
of the Nation, why should not full recognition be given it by the 
National Government? It certainly is of equal importance with 
Commerce, or Agriculture, or Labor. 

It is asserted by some objectors that merely to create a De- 
partment of Education and select a secretary will transfer the 
control of the schools from the states to the Nation ; that in some 
mysterious manner there will thus be created an autocracy that 
will reach out and absorb all the educational activities of the 
Nation ; that for some undisclosed and malevolent purpose a con- 
spiracy has been formed of the educators of the country to sub- 
vert the Constitution and destroy the liberties of the people. It 
is unnecessary to say in this presence that there is no effort being- 
made anywhere or by anybody to transfer the control of the 
schools from the states to the Nation. On the contrary, in most 
explicit terms the secretary is forbidden to exercise any control 
over the schools within the states, and that power is expressly 
reserved to the states. 

The objection is also urged that merely to grant appropria- 
tions from the national treasury contingent upon conditions, in 
and of itself transfers control from the states to the Nation ; that 
the states in order to secure the funds from the National Gov- 
ernment will surrender their Constitutional rights ; in short, that 
the Nation offers to buy from the states the control of the 
schools and assume the power of directing and managing the 
education of the people. 

This objection, strange as it may appear, is the argument 
most strongly urged by the opponents of the legislation for Na- 
tional aid. It must appear indeed remarkable that such a purpose 
could have actuated the educators of the country in the forma- 
tion of their bill. It has not generally been supposed that the 
school men of the Nation were engaged in a conspiracy to sub- 
vert the Constitution and secure control of the government. It 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 65 

must appear to every reasonable man that there is no desire nor 
can there be any. purpose on the part of the representatives of the 
government to take over the control of the schools. It must also 
be apparent that the people of the states are not so stupid and 
submissive as to sell their right to control the education of their 
children for a money bribe. 

The legislation is advocated because conditions are urgent and 
demand action, and because the states are in some cases unable 
and in others unwilling to meet the emergency without help It 
is to stimulate the states to greater activity in the education of 
their own people ; it is to aid them in reducing the burden and 
danger because of the ignorance of their people that this legis- 
lation is urged. The government has an equal interest with the 
states in the character of its citizens. The government has no 
citizens nor interests within its territory outside the states. Their 
people are its people, and their citizens are its citizens. If the 
people of the states are ignorant, so are the people of the Nation. 
If the peace, prosperity, and security of the states must depend 
upon the intelligence of its citizens, so is it with the Nation. With 
this community of interest there is a common obligation. So it 
is proposed to aid the states by granting them funds from the 
national treasury, -and in effect to say to the states: "The Nation- 
al Government will help you to remove this burden and danger 
from your people, because your people are my people, and your 
interests are my interests." In effect, also, the government de- 
clares to the states by this proposed legislation : "This aid is 
granted you upon the condition that you use it only for the pur- 
pose stated in the grant, and that you use it in your own way 
without dictation or control by the government." 

It may be again stated that all the conditions upon which aid 
is granted are statutory, and are specifically stated in the act. 
These requirements may be changed by Congress, but they can- 
not be changed by the secretary or any other executive officer. 
No additional requirements can be added, and no autocratic, 
bureaucratic, or centralized control imposed. 

It should be further stated that before any state can receive 
the benefits of the act such state must by legislative enactment 
accept its provisions. So that there must be an agreement of the 
representatives of the people of the Nation with the representa- 
tives of the people of the state before the legislation can become 
effective. Under such circumstances it is not probable, it is not 



66 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

possible that the state will surrender its rights, or that the Nation 
will transcend its powers. 

Attention is called to the fact that by the provisions of the bill 
the administration, the application, and distribution of the funds 
within the state are exclusively committed to the state author- 
ities. I think I am justified in saying that in no other legislation 
of this character ever enacted have the rights of the states been 
so carefully guarded. Let me call your attention to this provi- 
sion of the bill, found in Section 13, 1-3 : 

Provided, That courses of study, plans and methods for carry- 
ing out the purposes of this act within a state, shall be determined 
by the state and local educational authorities of said state, and 
'this act shall not be construed to require uniformity of courses 
of study, plans, and methods in the several states in order to 
secure the benefits herein provided : and provided further, That 
all the educational facilities encouraged by the provisions of 
this act and accepted by a state shall be organized, supervised, 
and administered exclusively by the legally constituted state and 
local educational authorities of said state, and the Secretary of 
education shall exercise no authority in relation thereto except 
Education shall exercise no authority in relation thereto except 
state shall be used for the purposes for which they are appro- 
priated by Congress. 

If any stronger or more explicit statement can be made sav- 
ing to the states their right to control their own schools in their 
own way and prohibiting any interference on the part of the 
general government, the friends of the measure would be glad 
to accept it. 

It is said that contributions from the national treasury are un- 
necessary, for the states will meet the emergency and provide the 
necessary means. If that were true, the objection would be good. 
But is it true? 

Take illiteracy, as an example, and consider conditions. The 
census of 1910 showed that in the United States there were 
5,500,000 over ten years of age who could not read or write any 
language. In addition there were 3,500,00 who could not speak, 
or read, or write English. This placed us below the standard of 
most of the civilized nations of the world. But that was not the 
worst. The examination of the draft registrants for service in 
the late war showed that of the men called between ihe ages of 
twenty-one and thirty-one, nearly 25 per cent could not read a 
newspaper, could not write a letter home, and could not read the 
posted orders about the camps. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 67 

The Nation's defense is thus doubly impaired; first, because 
one-fourth of the sons of America called to the colors are inca- 
pacitated for efficient service because of their ignorance ; and, 
second, because in a free country its safety is jeopardized when 
a determining portion of its voters cannot read the ballots they 
cast and can only vote as they are told. 

Consider the economic loss which Secretary Lane estimates 
as at least $825,000,000 each year. The Director of the Bureau 
of Mines states that of the 1,000,000 men engaged in mining in 
the United States 620,000 are foreigners, and that of these 
460,000 cannot speak English. He states that the removal of il- 
literacy among the miners would save annually 1,000 lives and 
150,000 injuries. Investigation has shown that one-half the in- 
dustrial accidents are the result of ignorance, because the work- 
ers cannot read the danger warnings or understand the orders 
given. 

It has been said that illiteracy is a southern problem. The 
facts do not warrant that conclusion. Georgia has 389,000 illit- 
erates, but New York has 406,000. Alabama has 352,000, while 
Pennsylvania has 354,ooo. Louisiana has 352,000, Mississippi 
290,000, and Texas 282,000; but Illinois has 168,000, Ohio, 
124,000, and even Massachusetts has 141,000. 

It is thought that illiteracy is a race problem. But it is much 
more than that. There are over 1,000,000 more white illiterates 
in the United States than illiterate negroes. 

Is not this clearly a national problem? If the Nation's safety 
is imperilled, if the lives of its own citizens are being lost, and if 
the states are not able or not willing without help to remove this 
reproach and danger, is not national aid justified and imperative? 

Consider the condition of our immigrant population. We 
now have over 15,000,000 foreign-born people in the United 
States. More than 5,000,000 cannot speak, read, or write Eng- 
lish. More than 2,000,000 cannot read or write any language. 
Unfortunately these foreigners often group themselves into alien 
settlements or colonies, where our language is not spoken, where 
our journals are not read, and where the whole environment is 
alien and un-American. These masses of alien ignorance con- 
stitute a rich soil for sowing the seeds of unrest and revolt. 
Revolutionary agitators who come to this country to advocate 
the destruction of our government find here their opportunity. 



68 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

To make the immigrant understand America is the only way 
to make him love America. He cannot love a country he does 
not understand. Education is the first requisite of Americaniza- 
tion. Education, first in our language, and then in the nature 
of our institutions is the best defense against the bolshevik and 
the anarchist. 

This demand is not being met. When great states like Mas- 
sachusetts and New York and Ohio have actually increased both 
their percentage and total of illiteracy within the decade from 
1900 to 1910 because of their failure to educate their foreign- 
born, we realize that even these enlightened commonwealths 
need stimulation and aid. 

Perhaps no disclosure of the draft examinations carries more 
reproach to our intelligence than the fact that out of about two 
thousand four hundred j^oung men examined for service seven 
hundred thousand, or nearly one-third, were found disqualified 
because of physical disability. Ninety per cent of these disabili- 
ties could have been prevented by a knowledge of the simplest 
rules of hygiene and health. It was ignorance, gross ignorance, 
that in the vast majority of cases was the cause of their incom- 
petence. 

There is but one adequate remedy for this disgraceful and 
distressing condition, — to put into all our schools a system of 
physical education. Unfortunately, this has not been done. The 
additional cost deprives thousands of schools and tens of thous- 
ands of children of this essential element of education. Here 
again is the stimulation and help of the Nation needed to remedy 
the existing unfortunate conditions. 

That gross inequalities in educational opportunities exist 
within and among the states is well known. In the south almost 
one-half of the negro children never see the inside of a school 
room. In the north there is hardly a city that has adequate 
facilities for all its children. In some rural communities and 
factory districts the value of the property is so small that local 
taxation cannot support the schools. On an average the country 
boy has two months less school than the city boy. 

Unfortunately, it is found that where the educational needs 
are greatest the schools are most inadequate. All over our land 
the poorest schools are in the poorest communities — just where 
the best schools are most needed. To equalize educational op- 
portunities is a task the Nation is especially qualified to under- 
take. To encourage and aid the backward states to bring their 
deficiencies up to a reasonable measure of efficiency and service 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 69 

is apparently a national duty. By such stimulation and coopera- 
tion we may be able to give every child in America the advan- 
tage of at least a common school education. 

The most pressing educational problem confronting the peo- 
ple of the United States at the present time is to obtain compe- 
tent teachers for our schools. Thousands of schools have been 
closed because teachers of any kind could not be secured. Tens 
of thousands of schools are now being taught by incompetent 
teachers. Three hundred thousand are teaching who have no 
professional training whatever. 

An equally imperative duty is that of providing means for 
the better preparation of teachers. We need about seven hun- 
dred thousand teachers to teach our schools, and this requires 
about one hundred and twenty thousand new teachers each j^ear 
to keep the quota full. Our schools and colleges preparing for 
teaching are turning out but twenty-four thousand each year. 
Nearly one hundred thousand must enter the profession each 
year inadequately prepared. This condition is alarming, and must 
be remedied. In some way we must bring the states and the peo- 
ple to a realization of this danger. Unless conditions can be 
bettered we shall have in the present decade a larger propor- 
tion of near-illiterates than was disclosed by the war regis- 
tration. Indifference as to the character of our schools and 
their teachers will inevitably lead to a deterioration of our 
citizenship. We must see to it that every school in the land is 
taught by a competent teacher. Nothing less than that is safe 
for either state or Nation. 

If illiteracy is a national peril, if ignorance of our language 
and institutions is a source of danger, if unjustifiable inequalities 
exist in educational opportunities in our land, if our young men 
called to the service of their country are incapacitated because 
of ignorance of the ordinary rules of health, if schools are being 
closed for want of teachers, and almost one-half are being 
taught by incompetent teachers, then it can fairly be claimed 
that national aid for education is justified and necessary. 

It is urged as an objection that it is unjust to call upon the 
stronger states to aid the weaker to educate their children ; that 
the money derived from general taxation which would fall 
heaviest on the richer states should not be used to help the 
poorer states ; that each state should bear the burden and re- 
sponsibility of educating its own people. 



70 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

This objection was urged from the beginning against the 
whole system of public schools. It was argued that parents 
should have the burden of educating their own children and that 
taxation to support common schools was unconstitutional and 
unjust. It was said the rich man was under no obligation to 
help educate the children of the poor. It was especially urged 
that those having no children to educate must not be taxed to 
help educate the children of others. It was still more strenuous- 
ly insisted that it was especially iniquitous to tax the property 
of a bachelor to carry on schools for others' children. 

But all those objections were disregarded, and now no one 
claims that it is unjust to tax the rich man to educate the poor 
man's children, and the bachelor must pay his taxes to support 
the schools, whether he wants to or not. It is recognized that 
the welfare of a community or state depends upon the character 
of its citizens ; that the city or state is concerned for its own 
safety and peace in the intelligence of all its citizens, and that 
each must contribute his share for the common good. 

So with the Nation. We have seen how its safety may be 
jeopardized because of the illiteracy and physical incapacity of 
so many of its young men. We have seen how in a free gov- 
ernment its security and prosperity depend on the intelligence of 
its entire electorate. Neither illiterates nor alien malcontents 
can be confined to any one state. And so it is a national problem 
as well as a state and local problem. Manifestly, it needs the 
cooperation of all these to find and supply the remedy. 

The cost of the government is urged as an objection to the 
legislation. To place this additional burden on the government 
at this time of extraordinarjr expenditures would be unwise, it 
is said. Our people already groaning under the weight of fed- 
eral taxes will not approve this addition to the load, it is argued. 
Granting the full weight of this objection, it must be admitted 
that the Nation must make choice as to its expenditures. Wise 
action depends on selecting those objects for national appropri- 
ations which are most needed and most important. There is 
nothing in our scheme of government more important than the 
education of the people. Whatever else may be left out, educa- 
tion cannot safely be excluded. And this may be said to the 
credit of our people, the one thing that justifies a tax in their 
judgment is that which strengthens and supports our public 
schools. There are many millions annually appropriated which 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 71 

in their opinion have much less justification than the appropria- 
tions authorized by this bill. We might cut off a hundred mil- 
lion from either the army or the navy bills with less danger and 
more profit than to omit this appropriation. We gave seventy- 
five millions the other day to the states for good roads. Are 
good roads of more importance than good schools? We are still 
spending millions to remove rocks from our harbors and snags 
from our rivers; to remove hog-cholera in Iowa, and cattle-ticks 
in Texas; to remove boll-weevil in Alabama, and wheat- rust in 
North Dakota, — are we justified in refusing to spend anything 
to remove illiteracy from our own American citizens? It is 
not that the things mentioned are not worthy of consideration, 
but certainly they are not more worthy of consideration than is 
the education of our children. Those things are after all but 
economic ills, while ignorance imperils the safety and endangers 
the perpetuity of the Nation itself. 

There are some outstanding facts regarding the relations of 
the Nation and the states toward education which it is wise to 
recognize. There has never been proposed in Congress any legis- 
lation which even suggested that the Nation should take from the 
states the control of education. No one has ever advocated it. 
no one now proposes it, no one in or out of Congress desires it. 
The proposition has no support anywhere by anyone. 

There is no legal authority for such legislation if anyone did 
propose it. If a bill carrying such a proposal were introduced, it 
would immediately be recognized as without Constitutional war- 
rant, and would never even reach the calendar of either Senate 
or House. 

To claim that anyone, sponsor or supporter of the pending 
educational bill, desires or expects national control of education 
to follow the enactment of the legislation under consideration is 
without the slightest sanction. To state that the emphatic and 
and repeated negations expressed in the strongest language that 
can be used which are incorporated in the very terms of the pro- 
posed law mean nothing and will not be effective, is to say that 
no law can be made effective by its terms. 

But while Congress has no desire nor purpose nor Constitu- 
tional power to take from the states the control of education, the 
general government has the right to aid and encourage the states 
in the eduaction of their and its citizens, and this right it has 
exercised repeatedly from the beginning of our history to the 



72 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

passage of the last Appropriation Act. It granted sections of the 
public lands to the states for schools. It granted townships of 
land for the creation and support of universities. Lands were 
given as long as they lasted, and then money was given. Congress 
gives annually over $2,500,000 from the national treasury for the 
"support and further endowment of colleges of agriculture and 
mechanic arts." Every year we give tens of millions of dollars 
from the national treasury in support of almost every form of 
education. Why is it that these grants are not opposed? Why is 
it that where education is so much needed, at the very bottom of 
our political and social structure, where it enters into the very 
texture of the fabric of our American citizenship — in form about 
which there is no controversy and in substance the acknowledged 
essential — why is it that when it is proposed to strengthen our 
common school system the proposition is condemned and op- 
posed? 



VIEWS OF PROFESSORS SPAULDING AND 

ROSS 

It is evident that the development of this, or of any other plan 
of education, national in scope and adapted to national needs, de- 
mands the establishment of a Department of Education in the 
National Government, a department that shall be on a par with 
other state departments, having a secretary at its head, who is a 
member of the President's Cabinet. Let no -one suppose that the 
establishment of such a Department of Education would mark an 
innovation. On the contrary, the present lack of such a depart- 
ment in the American government places it almost in a class by 
itself in this respect. In two score governments, all over the 
world, there is found a Department, or Ministry, of Education, 
or Public Instruction. America is distinguished as the one im- 
portant nation of the world that fails to recognize education as 
one of the half dozen or half score great national fundamental 
interests and responsibilities. This is a startling fact ; but the 
all-sufficient reason for adequate governmental recognition of 
public education in America is the simple reason that only 
through such recognition can there be assured to all the Ameri- 
can people adequate preparation for the great tasks that are be- 
fore them ; that only through such recognition of education can 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 73 

the American nation qualify itself to discharge the unprece- 
dented responsibilities that should be welcome, that will be inevi- 
table. — Professor Frank E. Spaulding. Atlantic Monthly. 125: 
538. April, 1920. 

Recognizing the tragic handicap of the unlettered man in a 
society which more and more takes intelligence for granted, edu- 
cational leaders deplore the great disparity in school opportun- 
ities. In American Commonwealths, for example, the school 
"year" varies from four months to ten months. In one state 
four-fifths of the teachers have only an elementary education, 
while in certain other states all are at least normal school or high 
school graduates. In 1916 the average pay of teachers in Cali- 
fornia was nearly thrice that of Mississippi. In the same year the 
state at the head of the list spent nine times as much on the edu- 
cation of its average child as did the state at the foot of the list. 
Apparently Scandinavia and the Balkans, Scotland and Chile, 
stand scarcely farther apart in respect to educational opportun- 
ities than do certain states of the American Union. Such in- 
equalities may not be trusted to disappear of themselves. Ignor- 
ance is self-perpetuating. Poor schools may become endemic in 
a region. Nevertheless, the intelligent communities must submit 
to be governed in part by the representatives of the dark-minded 
districts. No wonder they resort to state compulsion or state fi- 
nancial aid to level up educational opportunities within the state 
and advocate federal compulsion or federal financial aid to level 
up within the nation. Nor is this tendency to nationalize educa- 
tion peculiarly American ; it is, in fact, world wide. All progres- 
sive peoples are coming to feel that the child's schooling is too 
much a social concern to be left entirely to the direction of the 
parents, or even of the local community. — Professor Edward A. 
Ross. Principles of Sociology, p. 602-3. 



ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE BILL * 

1. The chief argument against the establishment of a Depart- 
ment of Education is based on the fear that the Federal Govern- 
ment would dominate education throughout the country. Presi- 
dent Hadley of Yale views the bill "as a long step in the Prus- 

1 By Dr. Robert H. Mahoney. The Federal Government and Educa- 
tion, p. 48-55. 



74 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

sianizing of American education," and regards the introduction 
of another cabinet minister "as calculated to weaken rather than 
strengthen the influence of the Cabinet." * He insists, moreover, 
that "the concentration of educational supervision in a national 
capital has always worked badly, and there is no reason to sup- 
pose that the United States would prove an exception to this gen- 
eral rule. French education when controlled from Paris has 
tended to ossify, and only as they have given independence to dif- 
ferent parts of the system has there been progress made. All the 
pieces of progress of the last century were done in opposition to 
the national incubus of a centralized bureau." ' Likewise Capen 
believes that under the bill the federal government would grad- 
ually and inevitably come to exercise a very large measure of 
dictation and control, and that federal control of local education- 
al activities secured and perpetuated by the tacit threat of with- 
holding federal grants would be intolerable. 3 

While the bill explicitly states that federal control of educa- 
tion in the states is not to prevail under the act, Dean Burris 
holds that it is there in spite of all efforts to disguise it, and that 
no such national program for education as that contemplated 
in the bill could be carried out without a large measure of fed- 
eral control both direct and indirect. If this control is vested 
in a Cabinet officer, it will be inevitably exposed to partisan 
influences. Besides, the presence of a Secretary of Education 
in the Cabinet is neither imperative nor desirable. For the pro- 
posed Department of Education a Federal Board of Education 
would be preferable. Under such a board, he maintains, con- 
tinuity in the development of well thought out policies would be 
assured, and the dangers arising from patronage in the appoint- 
ment of assistants would be prevented. 4 

Federal control over education is at once unconstitutional and 
undesirable, adds Burris; and in the words of former Senator 
Root it "calls for the exercise of power by the Federal Govern- 
ment which has not been committed to that government by the 
people of the United States in their Constitution, but has been 
reserved to the several states. It seems equally clear that no such 
power ought to be committed to the government, because it would 

1 The Educational Record. Vol. i. No. 3. p. T05. 

2 Ibid. 

3 The Educational Review. November, 1920. p. 287. 

4 Burris, W. P. Address, A Federal Department of Education. De 
partment of Superintendents, National Education Association, February 26, 
1920. 



THE TOWNER- STERLING BILL 75 

be absolutely inconsistent with one of the two primary purposes 
of our system of government, that is to say, preservation of the 
right of local self-government in the states, at the same time with 
the maintenance of national power." 1 According to Professor 
Guthrie of Columbia, the provisions of the bill would "inevitably 
involve an attempt at interference in the local affairs of the 
states, and the policy of so-called federalization of education 
once established would lead to an agitation and demand for a 
constitutional amendment to vest adequate power of centralized 
supervision and control in Congress." 2 In this way, believes Bur- 
ns, the influence now working for the beginning of a program 
of centralization would ultimately destroy the "very substance of 
Americanism, which is individualism, self-reliance, initiative, and 
responsibility." 3 

2. It is pointed out by Capen that the bill fails to coordinate 
the present educational activities of the Federal Government; it 
lays no satisfactory foundations since it "dodges the whole ques- 
tion of the coordination and simplification of the government's 
present educational activities. . . It is easily possible to determine 
on the basis of some defensible principle which existing govern- 
ment offices belong in a department with functions such as those 
of the proposed Department of Education. In failing to indicate 
which these are, the Framers and sponsors of the bill have not 
faced the primary obligation of their task.'^V It is especially noted 
that the bill fails to include the Federal Board for Vocational 
Education under the Department of Education. It is conceded 
by most educators that vocational education should be related or- 
ganically to the rest of the government's educational work; the 
attempt to separate it from general education in states and cities 
has been disastrous. 5 Granting, however, that the Federal Board 
is brought under the department as authorized by Section 3 of 
the act, an anomalous situation would ensue, because the Smith- 
Hughes Act admits supervision of education within the states, 
while the Towner-Sterling Bill denies such supervision. 6 

1 Quoted. Ibid. 

2 Bulletin. The Catholic Educational Association. Vol. XVI. No. 4. 
1920. 

3 Op. cit. 

4 The Educational Review, November, 1920. p. 2S6-7. *■■ 

5 Ibid. p. 291. 

6 Ibid. p. 292 



76 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

In the two- fold character of the measure, moreover, there 
is believed to exist a misalliance ; it is held that the Department 
of Education and the relief measure are two different and in 
some respects conflicting propositions ; and "to promote the sub- 
sidy feature the unification of the government's educational 
activities was sacrificed." 1 

3. While the friends of the bill believe that the measure 
would not involve partisan politics in the appointment of a 
Secretary of Education, the opponents of the bill are not so 
optimistic. 

In the recent volume, The Nation and the Schools, by 
Keith and Bagley, we read : "It is said that a President would 
probably appoint as Secretary of Education a member of his 
own political party. . . This assertion is not true with respect 
to those who have served as Commissioners of Education. . . 
It is reasonable to assume that the President would honestly 
desire to find the most capable man for the Secretaryship of 
Education and that he would make every possible effort to find 
such a man without making previous partisan service a prere- 
quisite for appointment. With this reasonable assurance, the 
part}' affiliation of the person appointed becomes insignificant." ' 

The high hopes expressed in the lines just quoted were given 
a severe jolt by the action of President Harding in removing 
United States Commissioner Claxton. To the friends of edu- 
cation everywhere, this action was especially unwelcome. 
Speaking editorially in the June, 1921, issue of the Journal of 
the National Education Association, Bagley complained : "It 
is most unfortunate that a change should be made at this time 
when the need for recognized national leadership in education 
is imperative. It is certain to be construed as having been 
determined by political motives and in total disregard of the 
growing demand for the elevation of the Nation's chief edu- 
cational office." Similarly, the Educational Review in its issue 
of September, 1921, commented that Commissioner Claxton's 
successor "would probably never have been selected by a body 
of experts or of impartial lay citizens, and the removal of Dr 
Claxton seems to have been somewhat impelled by political 
motives, which should everywhere be eliminated from edu- 
cation." 

This incident has convinced many of the opponents of the 
Sterling-Towner Bill that unless the measure is defeated, we 

1 Ibid. p. 291. 

2 p. 306. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL r? 

shall witness the inauguration at Washington of a vast politico- 
educational machine, and that instead of attaining higher dignity 
in the councils of the Nation, education may inherit the taint 
of sordid partisan politics. 

4. The principle of federal subsidy as provided in the bill 
likewise meets with strong disapproval. Capen regards it as an 
accidental discovery rather than the result of careful investiga- 
tion. 1 The principle of federal subsidy is still on trial and its 
universal validity is by no means proved; again, it appears "not 
to differentiate between federal stimulation of new educational 
movements and federal support of the general educational enter- 
prise of the states." 2 Basing his observations upon the opera- 
tion of previous laws involving the principle of federal subven- 
tions, Mann contends that the distribution of $100,000,000 on 
the fifty-fifty principle would be a fatal blunder for educational 
progress in the country. 3 It is also emphasized that the federal 
education office should exercise its leadership by means of ideas, 
and that when adequately equipped to investigate educational 
conditions, to point out defects and recommend improvements, it 
would accomplish everything that is sought by large federal ap- 
propriations. 4 It is pointed out that the result would be more 
wholesome were the state to undertake measures for their own 
improvement rather than have improvement thrust upon them ; 
the dollar for dollar appropriations are in principle not far re- 
moved from bribery. 5 

Judd observes that "the popular mind seems prone to accept 
the assumption that the Federal Government can with propriety 
undertake everything and anything. The most insidious form of 
this popular superstition is the widespread belief that the Federal 
Government has unlimited financial resources upon which it is 
entirely legitimate to draw for any worthy purpose which is 
otherwise likely to become insolvent." 6 There are no grounds 

1 Ibid. p. 289. 

2 The Educational Record. Vol. I. No. 1. p. 13. 

3 The Educational Review. November, 1920. p. 313. 

4 Pamphlet. American Council on Education. "Arguments Submitted, 
etc." p. 6. 

6 Ibid. 

""The Educational Record. Vol. 1. No. 3. 

Note. — In an address delivered at the installation of David Kinley as 
President of the University of Illinois, December 1, 1921, Presi- 
dent W. O. Thompson of Ohio State University declared that if 
the view prevails that education is a national issue, we may ex- 
pect that "national revenues will be increasingly used and that 
the problems of the relations between national and state agencies 
will increase in importance." 



7 8 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

for the assumption that financial support as provided in the 
Sterling-Towner Bill is the duty of the Federal Government 
or that it will operate to raise educational standards; it is be- 
lieved, moreover, that there is more danger than benefit in 
federal appropriations without federal supervision. 1 

While many of the arguments advanced against the subsidy 
principle might be regarded as speculative merely, the lessons of 
experience are available, and point clearly to the weakness of 
federal subsidy. The Federal Constitution of Switzerland, for 
example, includes an amendment authorizing the government to 
grant subventions to schools in the cantons. In Switzerland, this 
policy has not been generally approved; upon consultation with 
leading Swiss authorities, Bryce found that it was regarded as a 
fault in the Swiss system. Says Bryce : 

The plan of granting subventions from the national treasury 
to the cantons is alleged to be wasteful, injurious to the cantons 
in impairing self-helpfulness, and liable to be perverted for 
political purposes. The dominant party can, it is said, strength- 
en itself by these gifts, and bring a small canton too much 
under federal influence. Against this it is argued that the 
power of withholding a subvention is an engine for securing 
the enforcement of federal law by a canton disposed to be in- 
subordinate. No great mischief has resulted so far, but the 
practice has its risks. Local subsidies have been lavishly be- 
stowed, and misused for political ends, in the United States and 
in Canada. 2 

Again, in the experience of our own country, the subsidy 
principle has shown its weakness. We have at present laws au- 
thorizing federal cooperation with the states in the building of 
roads. To guard against abuses arising from this policy, Presi- 
dent Harding in his message of April 12, 1921, insisted that 
"large federal outlay demands a federal program of expenditure. 
. . The laws governing federal aid should be amended and 
strengthened. The federal agency of administration should be 
elevated to the importance and vested with the authority com- 
parable to the work before it. And Congress ought to prescribe 
conditions to federal appropriations which will justify the federal 
outlay." 

Federal aid for road-building operations is undoubtedly ad- 
visable and in accord with the Constitution; and to insure that 

1 Ibid. 

2 Bryce, James. Modern Democracies. New York. 1921. Vol. I. p. 367. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 79 

the federal apportionments are wisely expended, a policy of fed- 
eral control is necessary. The extension of such control over 
education, however, would be highly detrimental to the best in- 
terests of the country, and would be clearly unconstitutional. 

Experience to date, therefore, both at home and abroad, can 
scarcely be said to favor further extension of the subsidy prin- 
ciple in education. 

Finally, objection to the $100,000,000 appropriation is made on 
economic grounds. Blakely holds that common honesty justi- 
fies opposition to it on the ground of its excessive cost at a time 
when the country is suffering from serious financial burdens re- 
sulting from the war. 1 Former President Hadley of Yale objects 
on kindred grounds, believing that the present is a singularly in- 
opportune time for increased national expense at Washington, 
and that the adverse effect of the bill economically would greatly 
outw r eigh any possible good that might be derived. 2 It has been 
urged also that the determination of the purpose for which the 
appropriation should be spent is too far removed from the people 
who are taxed for the expenditure. 3 
v/ 5. Another argument which has been advanced by the oppo- 
/nents of the Sterling-Towner Bill is that it is a direct attack upon 
the principle of local self-government ; it imperils state sover- 
eignty and may give rise to paternalism and bureaucracy. It is 
stated that "bureaucratic control is the almost inevitable conse- 
quence of large federal subsidies devoted to any kind of under- 
taking," and that "however carefully the appropriating act may 
be drawn to preserve local autonomy and prevent undue federal 
influence there is finally in the hands of the federal office admin- 
istering the subsidies great coercive power." 4 Addressing the 
United States Senate May 22, 1920, Senator King declared that 
there is "a propaganda nation wide, to further weaken the states 
by transferring to the Federal Government the duty and responsi- 
bility resting upon the states of educating all within their borders. 
It is unquestionably the attribute of a sovereign state to provide 
the educational system for its inhabitants. It is an invasion of 

1 Blakely, P. L. Pamphlet. The Case Against the Smith-Towner Bill. 
New York. 1920. 

2 The Educational Record. Vol. I. No. 3. 

3 Pamphlet. American Council on Education. "Arguments Submitted, 
etc." p. 6. 

4 Ibid. p. 5- 



80 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

the rights of the states to have some other government super- 
impose its educational system upon the people therein or control 
in any manner the action of such state in relation to the sub- 
ject." 1 Likewise, Senator Thomas in addressing the Senate said 
that he was "profoundly convinced that one of the things that the 
states reserved to themselves and which is essential to their in- 
tegrity and to the integrity of the cause of local self-government 
is their continued retention of jurisdiction over the education of 
the people within their borders." 2 / Hence it is argued that ac- 
cordingly as the tendency to give up home rule in education is 
realized in the various communities and states, local interest 
in education will correspondingly wane. 

Impressed therefore with the possible effect of the bill upon 
local control, educational authorities within many of the states 
have been studying the measure in its bearing upon their respec- 
tive states. In a report to Governor Alfred E. Smith of New 
York State, July 19, 1910, submitted by Dr. Augustus S. Down- 
ing, the Assistant Commissioner of Education, after conference 
with President John H. Finley of the University of the State of 
New York, it is concluded among other things (1) that the bill 
would add a serious burden of taxation to the inhabitants of the 
state without just reason; (2) that the state of New York has 
taken the lead in the fields encouraged by the bill, and that so far 
as the state of New York is concerned, its provisions are not 
needed; (3) that judging from the experience of the state of 
New York which expends approximately $80,000,000 annually for 
the support of public education (which sum represents an in- 
crease of 33 M? per cent within recent years) that the $100,000,000 
for the entire country provided in the bill would prove only a 
pittance of the amount that would be actually required and 
demanded by the states that would take advantage of the pater- 
nalism thus offered them ; (4) that the introduction of the bill at 
this time is inopportune and its passage is clearly not desirable. 

In a Memorandum subjoined to Dr. Downing's report, the fol- 
lowing facts are pointed out : 

In 1918 New York paid 37 per cent of the Income Tax of the 
County. In 191 7 New York paid 25 per cent of the Expendi- 
tures of Government. Upon the later basis New York Citizens 
would pay for centralized education at least $25,000,000. Under 
the most liberal calculation, New York would receive under the 
proposed legislation less than $10,000,000. 

1 Congressional Record. May 22, 1920. 

2 Ibid. July 28, 19 19. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 81 

According to the memorandum, the total educational appro- 
priation of the state of New York for 1919 is $17,430,000 and 
under the proposed bill, "the additional moneys to New York 
would be surplusage, at the very disproportionate share in the 
expense of obtaining it" It further states that under the terms of 
the measure South Carolina would pay $228,000 and benefit to the 
extent of $1,755,000; Mississippi would pay $143,000 and benefit 
to the extent of $2,115,000. The following twelve states, Ala- 
bama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, New 
Mexico, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vir- 
ginia would collectively pay $7,237,000 and benefit to the extent 
of $25,424,000. 

It is maintained, therefore, that there is no demand for fed- 
eral legislation from the states that have been progressive. The 
demand originates from the states that have failed in compulsory 
education, or that seek to obtain "pork" at the expense of the 
richer states. The memorandum concludes that "the local com- 
munities of New York will in the end pay the bill and the work 
will not be done as well as if done by those concerned." 



OVER-ORGANIZATION OF EDUCATION l 

One of the most noteworthy of recent developments in Ameri- 
can life is the zeal with which machinery is designed and built 
ostensibly to serve various public interests and undertakings, but 
in reality to control them. Perhaps in no other way is the de- 
cline of faith in liberty so clearly marked. An academic wit once 
defined good administration as the doing extremely well of that 
which should not be done at all. If this clever phrase is to be ap- 
plied to public administration it would have to be altered so as to 
read, the doing ill of that which should not be done at all; for 
public administration, administration by collective authority, is al- 
most uniformly inefficient and for an obvious reason. In such 
case artificial choice takes the place of natural selection in the 
designation of agents, and since nature is wiser than man, par- 
ticularly political man, efficiency at once declines. In the United 
States we are, in flat defiance of all our proclaimed principles and 
ideals, building a series of bureaucracies that will put to shame 
the best efforts of the government of the Tsar of all the Russias 

1 Annual report of the President of Columbia University. 1921. p. 20-3. 



82 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

when in the heyday of its glory. We are surrounded by agents, 
special agents, inspectors and spies, and the people are called up- 
on to support through their taxes in harmful and un-American 
activities whole armies of individuals who should be engaged in 
productive industry. When anything appears to go wrong, or 
when any desirable movement seems to lag, a cry goes up for the 
creation of some new board or commission, and for an appro- 
priation of public funds to maintain it in reasonable comfort. An 
infinite number of blank forms must be filled and an infinite 
number of records must be kept, classified and audited at stead- 
ily mounting cost. 

For a long time the excellent limitations of the American 
form of Federal Government held these movements in check, so 
far as the National Government itself was concerned. When, 
however, the ingenious discovery was made that the National 
Government might aid the states to do what lay within their pro- 
vince but was denied to the National Government itself, the door 
was opened to a host of schemes. These have followed each other 
in rapid succession, all urged with a certain amount of plausibil- 
ity and with an appeal to kindly sentiment, usually supported by 
vigorous propaganda and zealous paid agents. 

So far as education is concerned, there has been over-organ- 
ization for a long time past. Too many persons are engaged in 
supervising, in inspecting and in recording the work of other per- 
sons. There is too much machinery, and in consequence a steady 
temptation to lay more stress upon the form of education than 
upon its content. Statistics displace scholarship. There are, in ad- 
dition, too many laws and too precise laws, and not enough op- 
portunity for those mistakes and failures, due to individual in- 
itiative and experiment, which are the foundation for great and 
lasting success. 

It is now proposed to bureaucratize and to bring into uni- 
formity the educational system of the whole United States, while 
making^ the most solemn assurance that nothing of the kind is in- 
tended*^The glory and the successes of education in the United 
States are due to its freedom, to its unevennesses, to its reflection 
of the needs and ambitions and capacities of local communities, 
and to its being kept in close and constant touch with the people 
themselves. There is not money enough in the United States, 
even if every dollar of it were expended on education, to 
produce by federal authority or through what is naively called 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 83 

cooperation between the Federal Government and the several 
states, educational results that would be at all comparable with 
those that have already been reached under the free and natural 
system that has grown up among us. If tax-supported education 
be first encouraged and inspected, and then little by little com- 
pletely controlled, by central authority, European experience 
shows precisely what will happen. In so far as the schools of 
France are controlled from the Ministry of Education in Paris, 
they tend to harden into uniform machines, and it is only when 
freedom is given to different types of school or to different local- 
ities, that any real progress is made. Anything worse than the 
system which has prevailed in Prussia would be difficult to im- 
agine. It is universally acknowledged that the unhappv decline in 
German university freedom and effectiveness, and the equally un- 
happy subjection of the educated classes to the dictates of the 
political and military ruling groups, were the direct result of the 
highly centralized and efficient control from Berlin of the 
nation's schools and universities. For Americans now to accept 
oversight and direction of their tax-supported schools and col- 
leges from Washington would mean that they had failed to learn 
one of the plainest and most weighty lessons of the war. It is 
true that education is a national problem and a national responsi- 
bility; it is also true that it has been characteristic of the Ameri- 
can people to solve their most difficult national problems and to 
bear their heaviest national responsibilities through their own 
action in the field of liberty rather than through the agency of 
organized government. Once more to tap the federal treasury 
under the guise of aiding the states, and once more to establish 
an army of bureaucrats in Washington and another army of in- 
spectors roaming at large throughout the land, will not only fail 
to accomplish any permanent improvement in the education of 
our people, but it will assist in effecting so great a revolution in 
our American form of government as one day to endanger its 
perpetuity. Illiteracy will not be sensibly diminished, if at all, by 
federal appropriations, nor will the physical health of the people 
be thereby improved. The major portion of any appropriation 
that may be made will certainly be swallowed up in meeting the 
cost of doing ill that which should not be done at all. The true 
path of advance in education is to be found in the direction of 
keeping the people's schools closely in touch with the people 
themselves. Bureaucrats and experts will speedily take the life 



84 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

out of even the best schools and reduce them to dried 
and mounted specimens of pedagogic fatuity. Unless the school 
is both the work and the pride of the community which it serves, 
it is nothing. A school system that grows naturally in response 
to the needs and ambitions of a hundred thousand different local- 
ities, will be a better school system than any which can be imposed 
upon those localities by the aid of grants of public money from 
the federal treasury, accompanied by federal regulations, federal 
inspections, federal reports and federal uniformities. 



THE BILL IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL 1 

Turning then to the Smith-Towner Bill we read a document 
which, however laudable in the purposes which it seeks to encom- 
pass, confers upon the Federal Government a power deliberately 
withheld by the framers of the "growth of Americanism," we 
find the complete charter of an institution most foreign both to 
the Constitution and to American ideals, a federal censorship 
over the public schools of the states. The bill provides for the 
creation of a federal Secretary of Education, not a lay-figure, but 
a political appointee with powers as unique as they are danger- 
ous. To this ofhcer it is proposed to entrust, and at a time when 
the general unrest fostered by abnormal economic conditions 
threatens national financial disaster, the annual distribution of 
$100,000,000 among such states as are willing to barter their edu- 
cational independence. Waving for the moment the constitution- 
al warrant for the application of federal funds to local needs of 
this character, let us ask, first, if this is a time for financial ex- 
periments of this magnitude, and next, if it be wise to entrust a 
political appointee, however well-meaning, with the exclusive su- 
pervision of this great appropriation, together with such other 
sums as by the application of political motives may be granted 
by, or extorted from, Congress. 

Again we scan the Constitution to discover in its letter or 
its spirit, some justification for the creation of a Federal Sec- 
retary of Education. Enriched as that venerable document now 
is with numerous amendments, we nowhere come upon a clause 
or section or amendment authorizing this royal distributor of 

1 By Rev. Paul L. Blakely. The Case Against the Smith-Towner Bill. 
P- 5-14- 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 85 

patronage to spineless mendicant states. And since this power 
has not been conferred upon Congress by the Constitution, we 
must conclude that it does not exist. 

Endeavoring to reconcile the provisions of the Smith-Towner 
Bill with his knowledge of the Constitution, the seeker after 
truth puts the question : "How does the state of New Jersey, 
for instance, arrange to 'cooperate' with the Federal Secretary 
of Education?" He will find the answer in Section 14 of the 
bill. The chief educational authority of the state is first directed 
to report in writing to the federal secretary. This report must 
show, to the satisfaction of the secretary, that the state of New 
Jersey "is prepared to carry out the provisions of this act." 
The question then arises, "What are the provisions of this act?" 
These are specified in Sections 8 to 12, both inclusive. They enum- 
erate the instruction of illiterates ten years of age and over, in 
"the common school branches and the duties of citizenship ;" 
the Americanization of immigrants, a consummation to be 
reached by teaching them "to speak and read the English lan- 
guage and to understand and appreciate the spirit and purpose 
of the American Government, and the duties of citizenship in 
a free country;" the improvement of educational opportunities 
by the partial payment of teachers' salaries, better instruction 
and longer school terms, especially in rural districts, and the 
extension and adaptation of public libraries for educational 
purposes ; the preparation of teachers for public school service 
and the improvement of teachers in service by the establish- 
ment of scholarships, and otherwise. 

In his report, the chief educational authority must submit to 
the Secretary of Education a complete account of all that the 
state of New Jersey is doing and is prepared to do, to further 
these purposes. He must establish, to take a dangerous instance, 
that the state of New Jersey is properly teaching the "Duties 
of Citizenship" and "the spirit and purposes of the American 
Government," and submit himself in this, as in every other detail 
specified by the bill or adducible from it, to the sole judgment 
of the secretary. // the Secretary refuses his approval, the state 
of New Jersey must revise its courses of study for the children 
in the schools and for the teachers in the normal colleges, to 
the degree prescribed by this political appointee, or, if so ord- 
ered, not merely revise them, but reform them altogether. If 
this power, plainly conferred by the Smith-Towner Bill upon the 



86 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

proposed Secretary of Education, does not make that official an 
educational dictator, the meaning of the phrase has changed 
since the current dictionaries were electrotyped. 

Supposing the educational program of the state of New 
Jersey to have merited the august approval of the political 
appointee at Washington, the state, to insure a continuance of 
that favor, must continue to subject itself to the federal educa- 
tional autocrat. The secretary is not only permitted but directed 
to take such means as may be necessary "to insure that all funds 
apportioned to said state shall be used for the purposes" for 
which they were appropriated. Granted the principle of the 
Smith-Towner Bill, this provision is altogether necessary. There 
is no escape from the conclusion that whatever the Federal Gov- 
ernment subsidizes the Federal Government controls, whether 
it be the waterway leading to the Gatun Dam or the schools of 
the respective states. Obviously, then, any studies or courses of 
study which the state of New Jersey may wish to introduce must 
be approved as in accordance with the purposes of the act, by the 
Secretary of Education. Similarly, should the state wish to dis- 
continue or to revise certain methods in the training of its 
teachers, or to adopt an entirely new program, such action can- 
not be taken without permission of the secretary. Force is im- 
parted to his orders by his control of the $100,000,000 federal 
appropriation. Should he judge that the "apportionment or 
apportionments are not being used in accordance with the pro- 
visions of the act," he is directed to withhold them, and he 
will also close the „sluice in the golden stream, should the state 
of New Jersey fail to render an account of its educational work 
later than September 1, in any year. 

As it cannot be supposed that the Secretary of Education will 
be advised by a kind of clairvoyance concerning the work of the 
schools in any "cooperating" state, the conclusion seems legiti- 
mate that the secretary will obtain this information through 
the examiners, investigators, and the assorted crowd of Peep- 
ing Toms and Paul Prys who, armed with federal credentials, 
will descend upon the schools of the respective states. Of 
course, it should be remembered, as the National Education 
Association is always assuring us, the federal secretary will 
exercise no control whatever over these schools. He will merely 
review their courses of study, direct the training of their teach- 
ers, call them to account when they fall below the dizzy altitude 



THE TOWNER-STERLTNG BILL 87 

of the federal standards, and cnt them off from all federal ap- 
portionment, when "in his judgment" this punishment seems 
advisable, or fo\r political reasons, imperative. 

What part of the state's right over schools conducted by 
and under its jurisdiction can be maintained under these 
arbitrary conditions? In what respect does this political ap- 
pointee, the proposed Federal Secretary of Education, ruling 
upon state educational programs with a finality to be over-turned 
only by his removal, differ from an educational autocrat? Nor 
let it be said that no state is compelled to "cooperate" with this 
dispenser of a federal educational slush-fund. If it does not 
"cooperate" it is penalized. For what it cannot in honor accept, 
it is forced to pay. Yet that the complete liberty of the several 
states is secured by Section 14 of this bill is a claim that is 
continually advanced by its promoters, especially by the Na- 
tional Education Association. 

And provided further, That all the educational facilities 
encouraged by the provisions of this act and accepted by a 
state shall be organized, supervised and administered exclu- 
sively by the legally constituted state and local educational 
authorities of said state, and the Secretary of Education shall 
exercise no authority in relation thereto, except as herein pro- 
vided to insure that all funds apportioned to said state shall 
be used for the purposes for which they are appropriated and 
in accordance with the provisions of this act accepted by said 
state. 

Any force which these provisions might possess is negatived 
both by the express exceptions, and by other sections of the bill. 
Thus "state and local educational authorities" clothed, apparent- 
ly, with plenary powers over their schools, are in reality sub- 
ject to the orders of the federal secretary. They may do what 
they wish, provided, always, that their wishes are in accord 
with the master-mind at Washington. It has already been 
pointed out that as a first preliminary, the state's program must 
be submitted to the judgment of the secretary. It cannot be 
contended that the secretary is obliged to approve any and all 
programs which may be submitted. The provisions of the act 
are discretionary in this respect, not mandatory. If the sec- 
retary can approve he can reject, and he can also revise. The 
claim, theretofore, that under the Smith-Towner Bill exclusive 
authority over the schools is left to the states cannot be main- 
tained. The process prescribed by the bill opens with an act 



88 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

on the part of the state which is equivalent to an abdication of 
this authority. 

Further, the bill reserves to the federal secretary authority 
to decide at all times whether or not the programs offered by a 
"cooperating" state are in keeping with the provisions of the 
act, gives him complete power to assign or withhold the appor- 
tionment of any state, and the right to discontinue all payments 
should a state refuse or fail in any year to file a report of its 
educational work. 

Here it is of the highest importance to point out the precise 
'provisions of this act" upon which the federal secretary is 
empowered to rule with finality. They are : 

1. "Common school branches and the duties of citizenship, 
and when advisable" vocational education. (Section 8.) 

2. Courses in "Americanization" including instruction in 
civics and government. (Section 9.) 

3. Plans for the payment of teachers' salaries, for "better 
instruction," for the extension of school terms, for extending 
and adapting public libraries for school purposes, for "provid- 
ing equally good educational opportunities for the children in 
the several states." (Section 10.) 

To equalize educational opportunities in the several states, 
the federal secretary must necessarily control these "opportu- 
nities." This absolute control is given him by the Smith Bill. 

4. Federal power to exact a minimum school-year, a com- 
pulsory education law, and a basic language law, applying to 
all institutions, private and public. (Section 10.) 

5. Power to exact instruction in "physical education," the 
appointment of "school nurses, dental clinics," and plans "other- 
wise promoting physical and mental welfare." (Section 11.) 

6. Power to supervise and, if necessary, dictate plans for 
"the preparation of teachers for public school service," "to 
provide and extend facilities for the improvement of teachers 
already in service," and to enlist teachers "by the establishment 
of scholarships and otherwise." (Section 12.) 

Armed with this power of control, the secretary is an abso- 
lute educational dictator, for the above requirements practically 
cover the entire field of school economy, from courses of study 
for the children to courses of study for teachers, actual and 
prospective. On all of them the states must submit their plans to 
the secretary for approval. On all of them, the secretary is em- 
powered to rule with finality. In other words, under the Smith- 
Towner Bill, the secretary may dictate the entire educational 
policy of any state. 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 83 

Is this "exclusive control by the state" as we are assured by 
the friends of the bill? Not by deduction, but from the ex- 
plicit provisions of the bill the "cooperating" state may organize 
and administer its schools "exclusively," only after the state has 
submitted its educational policy to the federal secretary, and 
has secured his approval. Should a difference of opinion arise, 
federal must take precedence of state authority. Should the 
state decline to yield, the federal secretary will refuse his 
approbation, and on this approbation the federal appropriation 
depends. Even after approbation, the state must file an annual 
report with the secretary, who is empowered to cut the state 
off from any and all appropriations should the report be deemed 
unsatisfactory. In other words, the state may conduct its schools 
as it wishes, provided that it always wishes to conduct them 
according to orders issued by a political appointee, the federal 
Secretary of Education. This is not exclusive state control. It 
is absolute federal control, a philosophy of Caesarism against 
which the framers of the Constitution provided by denying the 
Federal Government control of education within the states. 



BILL TO EUROPEANIZE OUR PUBLIC 
SCHOOLS 1 

// the day should ever arrive {which God forbid) zvhen the 
people of the different parts of our country should allow their 
local affairs to be administered from Washington — on that day 
the progressive political career of the American people zvill have 
come to an end, and the hopes that have been built upon it for 
the future happiness a»id prosperity of mankind will be zvrecked 
forever. — (John Fiske, in A Critical Period of American His- 
tory). 

Without debate, but not without a preliminary propaganda 
that might well make any alien agent envious of its efficacy, the 
National Education Association in national convention assembled 
has again indorsed the Towner-Sterling Bill. A big fund is being 
raised by the proponents of this measure to pay the cost of the 
lobby that is trying to jam it through the Congress during a 
campaign year, while the jamming ( process is comparatively 
simple, and down the throats of the American people who will be 

1 Boston Transcript. July 7, 1922. 



go THE REFERENCE SHELF 

taxed to pay the cost of this elaborate scheme with a hyphenated 
name. 

What is the Towner-Sterling Bill? It is a bill to Europeanize 
the educational system of the United States, to scrap the free 
school system of the several states and substitute in its place a 
federal system of education, subsidized from Washington, regu- 
lated from Washington, and all in imitation of the imperialistic 
methods of the Old World. The main provisions of the bill are 
two : The first provides for the creation by Congress of a Federal 
department of education to be headed by a secretary who shall be 
nominated by the President, with the advice and consent of the 
Senate, and shall be a member of the President's Cabinet. The 
second provides federal aid in education in the form of a federal 
subsidy to be taken out of the federal treasury and doled out 
among the states to be used in education as Congress may from 
time to time decree. These two main provisions are enough to 
condemn the measure in the eyes of true Americans who take the 
trouble to think the thing through, and in their hearts cherish the 
hope of making a contribution in their day and generation toward 
the conservation and enhancement of that "American character" 
at home and abroad which it was the dream of Washington to 
develop and the destiny of Lincoln to save and the glory of 
Roosevelt to incarnate in his life and work. 

Any bill providing for the creation of an additional executive 
department at Washington and an additional member of the Cab- 
inet is to that extent a bad bill and ought to be opposed by every 
taxpayer in the land. Experience has demonstrated that the num- 
ber of executive departments and the size of the Cabinet should 
be reduced, not increased, and in the light of that experience a 
plan for the reorganization of the executive branch of the gov- 
ernment has been prepared and is now before the President, who 
will presently submit it to Congress as a basis for remedial legis- 
lation. Any bill that provides for further trespassing by the Fed- 
eral Government upon the premises placed by the Constitution in 
the control of the several states is also bad and ought to be op- 
posed by every taxpayer in the land. It is true that federal con- 
trol will hasten standardization of education, but what tru« 
American, believing in education and religious freedom, wishes 
to see a system of standardized education or standardized relig- 

. ion established in this country and controlled in Washington? 

1 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 91 

Our own Congressman John Jacob Rogers voices, we believe, 
the true sentiments of the plain people of Massachusetts when he 
declare his belief that "Massachusetts or Califonia is a better 
judge of what her people should learn and use and in what 
schools they should learn it than any bureau or department chief 
can be." The late Franklin K. Lane, the able Secretary of the In- 
terior of the last administration, put the argument against the 
Towner-Sterling Bill in a single sentence when he said : "Federal 
control of schools would be a curse, because the inevitable effect 
of federal control is to standarize." President Goodnow, of 
Johns Hopkins University, sees in this elaborate scheme with a 
hyphenated name "a most dangerous usurpation of power in 
Washington that will undermine the rights of the people." Presi- 
dent Butler, of Columbia University, puts the case in language so 
plain that parents and pupils alike can understand the menace 
of this measure to our happiness as a people at home and our 
prestige as a nation abroad, when he warns the country that 
"once more to tap the federal treasury under the guise of aiding 
the state, and once more to establish an army of bureaucrats in 
Washington, and another army of inspectors roaming at large 
through the land, will not only fail to accomplish any permanent 
improvement in the education of our people but will assist in ef- 
fecting so great a revolution in our form of government as to en- 
danger one day its perpetuity.'^ President Hadley, of Yale Uni- 
versity, was in Berlin in the winter of 1907-8 and saw a great 
deal of the inside working of what was then the Imperial Ger- 
man Government; he noiied that the degradation of German 
thought was largely due to the fact that through the establish- 
ment, first, of Berlin University and, second, of other centralized 
Prussian authorities, "the politicians had become able to throttle 
free thought." He regards the Towner- Sterling Bill as "a long 
step in the Prussianizing of American education," and so will 
every other American when he examines the provisions of the 
bill in the light of "the plainest and most weighty lessons of the 
war." 

But the lobby back of the Towner-Sterling Bill would have the 
public believe that it does not provide for federal control of pub- 
lic education but that the Federal Government will be willing to 
scatter millions of dollars from its treasury broadcast through 
the several states and ask no questions as to the expenditure. If 
this were true, it would be taxation without representation — a 
tyranny more intolerable than the yoke that would be put upon 



92 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

the youth of America for the rest of the time by the European- 
izing of our public schools. Of course, it is not true; it is gro- 
tesquely untrue, for the reason that the Federal Government 
never has been and never will be willing to subsidize an enter- 
prise without retaining the right to regulate the expenditure of 
the subsidy, and federal regulation is only another name for fed- 
eral control. 

It would be bad enough to scrap our American system of free 
schools in the several states and set. up in its place a Federal De- 
partment of Education, whose control would immediately become 
a football of partisan politics, but the vision of the National Edu- 
cation Association and the lobby that is backing the Towner- 
Sterling Bill is a "a word vision." Already steps have been taken 
looking to the "internationalizing" of the association. If that is 
accomplished and this organization gains control of a Federal De- 
partment of Education, we shall soon see federal control of our 
public-school system give way to international meddling, with a 
superdepartment of education set up at Geneva as an adjunct of 
the supergovernment provided for in the covenant of the 
League of Nations. Every teacher in the land drawing a subsidy 
under this elaborate scheme with a hyphenated name could then 
be mobilized in support of a drive to force the United States into 
full membership in "the evil thing with a holy name," as the late 
Senator Knox rightly called the League of Nations. 



APPENDIX 

TOWNER-STERLING BILL 

H. R. 7 — S. 1252 
67TH Congress 

A BILL 

To create a Department of Education, to authorize appropriations 
for the conduct o£ said department, to authorize the appropri- 
ation of money to encourage the States in the promotion and 
support of education, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That there 
is hereby created an executive department in the Government to 
be called the Department of Education, with a Secretary of Edu- 
cation, who shall be the head thereof, to be appointed by the 
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and 
who shall receive a salary of $12,000 per annum, and whose ten- 
ure of office shall be the same as that of the heads of other ex- 
ecutive departments; and section 158 of the Revised Statutes is 
hereby amended to include such department, and the provisions 
of title 4 of the Revised Statutes, including all amendments 
thereto, are hereby made applicable to said department. The Sec- 
retary of Education shall cause a seal of office to be made for 
such department of such device as the President shall approve, 
and judicial notice shall be taken of said seal. 

Sec. 2. That there shall be in said department an Assistant 
Secretary of Education, to be appointed by the President, who 
shall receive a salary to be determined by Congress. He shall 
perform such duties as may be prescribed by the Secretary or re- 
quired by law. There shall also be one chief and a disbursing 
clerk and such chiefs of bureaus and clerical assistants as may 
from time to time be authorized by Congress. 

Sec. 3. That there is hereby transferred to the Department 
of Education the Bureau of Education, and such offices, bureaus, 
divisions, boards, or branches of the Government, connected with 



94 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

or attached to any of the executive departments or organized in- 
dependently of any department, as Congress may determine should 
be administered by the Department of Education, and all such 
offices, bureaus, divisions, boards, or branches of the Government 
so transferred by act of Congress shall thereafter be adminis- 
tered by the Department of Education, as hereinafter provided. 

All officers, clerks, and employees employed in or by any of- 
fice, bureau, division, board, or branch of the Government, trans- 
ferred in accordance with the provisions of this Act to the De- 
partment of Education, shall each and all be transferred to said 
Department of Education at their existing grades and salaries, 
except where otherwise provided in this Act; and the office rec- 
ords and papers on file pertaining exclusively to the business of 
any such office, bureau, division, board, or branch of the Govern- 
ment so transferred, together with the furniture and equipment 
thereof, shall be transferred to said department. 

Sec. 4. That the Secretary of Education shall have charge, in 
the buildings or premises occupied by or assigned to the Depart- 
ment of Education, of the library, furniture, fixtures, records, 
and other property used therein or pertaining thereto, and may ex- 
pend for rental of appropriate quarters for the accommodation 
of the Department of Education within the District of Columbia, 
and for the library, furniture, equipment, and all other incidental 
expenses, such sums as Congress may provide from time to time. 

All power and authority conferred by law upon the head of 
any executive department, or upon any administrative board, over 
any officer, office, bureau, division, board, or branch of the Gov- 
ernment, transferred in accordance with the provisions of this 
Act to the Department of Education, shall, after such 
transfer, be vested in the Secretary of Education, and all business 
arising therefrom or pertaining thereto, and all duties performed 
in connection therewith shall thereafter be administered by the 
Department of Education. 

All laws prescribing the work and defining the duties and 
powers of the several offices, bureaus, divisions, boards, or 
branches of the Government, transferred in accordance with the 
provisions of this Act to the Department of Education, shall, in 
so far as the same are not in conflict with the provisions of this 
Act, remain in full force and effect and be administered by the 
Secretary of Education, to whom is hereby granted authority to 
reorganize the work of any and all of the said offices, bureaus, 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 95 

hoards, or branches of the Government so transferred in such 
way as will in his judgment best accomplish the purposes of this 
Act. 

Sec. 5. That the Department of Education shall conduct stu- 
dies and investigations in the field of education and report there- 
on. Research shall be undertaken in (a) illiteracy; (b) immi- 
migrant education; (c) public school education, and especially 
rural education; (d) physical education, including health educa- 
tion, recreation, and sanitation; (e) preparation and supply of 
competent teachers for the public schools ; (/) higher education ; 
and in such other fields as, in the judgment of the Secretary of 
Education, may require attention and study. 

In order to carry out the provisions of this section the Sec- 
retary of Education is authorized, in the same manner as pro- 
vided for appointments in other departments, to make appoint- 
ments, or recommendations of appointments, of educational at- 
taches to foreign embassies, and of such investigators and repre- 
sentatives as may be needed, subject to the appropriations that 
have been made or may hereafter be made to any office, bureau, 
division, board, or branch of the Government transferred in ac- 
cordance with the provisions of this Act to the Department of 
Education; and where appropriations have not been made there- 
for the appropriation provided in section 6 of this Act shall be 
made available. 

Sec. 6. That for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1922, and an- 
nually thereafter, the sum of $500,000, or so much thereof as may 
be necessary, is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any 
money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to the De- 
partment of Education, for the purpose of paying salaries and 
conducting studies and investigations, and paying all incidental 
and traveling expenses and rent where necessary, and for the pur- 
pose of enabling the Department of Education to carry out the 
provisions of this Act. And all appropriations which have been 
made and which may hereafter be made to any office, bureau, di- 
vision, board, or branch of the Government, transferred in ac- 
cordance with the provisions of this Act to the Department of 
Education, are hereby continued in full force and effect, and shall 
be administered by the Secretary of Education in such manner as 
is prescribed by law. 

Sec. 7. In order to encourage the States to remove illiteracy 
$7,500,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is authorized 



96 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

to be appropriated annually for the instruction of illiterates 
fourteen years of age and over. Said sum shall be apportioned 
to the States which qualify under the provisions of this Act, in 
the proportions which their respective illiterate populations four- 
teen years of age and over, not including foreign-born illiterates, 
bear to such total illiterate population of the United States, not 
including outlying possessions, according to the last preceding 
census of the United States. All funds apportioned to a State 
for the removal of illiteracy shall be distributed and administered 
in accordance with the laws of said State in like manner as the 
funds provided by State and local authorities for the same pur- 
pose, and the State and local education authorities of said State 
shall determine the courses of study, plans, and methods for car- 
rying out the purposes of this section within said State in accord- 
ance with the laws thereof. 

Sec. 8. That in order to encourage the States in the Ameri- 
canization of immigrants $7,500,000, or so much thereof as may be 
necessary, is authorized to be appropriated annually to teach im- 
migrants fourteen years of age and over to speak and read the 
English language and to understand and appreciate the Govern- 
ment of the United States and the duties of citizenship. The said 
sum shall be apportioned to the States which qualify under the 
provisions of this Act in the proportions which their respective 
foreign-born populations bear to the total foreign-born population 
of the United States, not including outlying possessions accord- 
ing to the last preceding census of the United States. All funds 
apportioned to a State for the Americanization of immigrants 
shall be distributed and administered in accordance with the laws 
of said State in like manner as the funds provided by State and 
local authorities for the same purpose, and the State and local 
educational authorities of said State shall determine the courses 
of study, plans, and methods for carrying out the purposes of 
this section within said State in accordance with the laws thereof. 

Sec. 9. That in order to encourage the States to equalize edu- 
cational opportunities $50,000,000 or so much thereof as may be 
necessary is authorized to be appropriated annually to be used in 
public elementary and secondary schools for the partial payment 
of teachers' salaries, for providing better instruction and ex- 
tended school terms especially in rural schools and schools in 
sparsely settled localities, for the extension and adaptation of 
public libraries for educational purposes, and otherwise providing 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 97 

equally good educational apportunities for the children of the 
several States. The said sum shall be apportioned to the States 
which qualify under the provisions of this Act one-half in the pro- 
portions which the number of children between the ages of six 
and twenty-one of the respective States bears to the total number 
of such children in the United States, and one-half in the propor- 
tions which the number of public-school teachers employed in 
teaching positions in the respective States bears to the total num- 
ber of public-school teachers so employed in the United States, 
not including outlying possessions, said apportionment to be 
based upon statistics collected annually by the Department of 
Education. All funds apportioned to a State to equalize educa- 
tional opportunities shall be distributed and administered in ac- 
cordance with the laws of said State in like manner as the funds 
provided by States and local authorities for the same purpose, 
and the State and local educational authorities of said State shall 
determine the courses of study, plans and methods for carrying 
out the purposes of this section within said State in accordance 
with the laws thereof : Provided, however, That the apportion- 
ments authorized by this section shall be made only to such 
States as by law provide: (a) A legal school term of at least 
twenty-four weeks in each year for the benefit of all children of 
school age in such State; (b) A compulsory school attendance 
law requiring all children between the ages of seven and fourteen 
years to attend some school for at least twenty-four weeks in 
each year; (c) That the English language shall be the basic lan- 
guage of instruction in the common school branches in all schools, 
public and private : Provided, That apportionment may be made 
under the provisions of this section to a State prevented by its 
constitution from full compliance with the foregoing conditions 
if said conditions are approximated as nearly as constitutional 
limitations will permit. 

Sec. to. That in order to encourage the States in the pro- 
motion of physical education, $20,000,000, or so much thereof as 
may be necessary, is authorized to be appropriated annually for 
physical education and instruction in the principles of health and 
sanitation. Said sum shall be apportioned to the States which 
qualify under the provisions of this Act in the proportions which 
their respective populations bear to the total population of the 
United States, not including outlying possessions, according to the 
last preceding census of the United States. All funds apportioned 



98 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

and administered in accordance with the laws of said State in like 
manner as the funds provided by State and local authorities for 
the same purpose, and the State and local educational authorities 
of said State shall determine the courses of study, plans, and 
methods for carrying out the purposes of this section within said 
State in accordance with the laws thereof. 

Sec. ii. That in order to encourage the States in the prep- 
aration of teachers for public-school service, $15,000,000, or so 
much thereof as may be necessary, is authorized to be appropri- 
ated annually to provide and extend facilities for the improve- 
ment of teachers in service and for the more adequate prepa- 
ration of prospective teachers, and to provide an increased number 
of trained and competent teachers by encouraging through the es- 
tablishment of scholarships and otherwise a greater number of 
talented young persons to make adequate preparation for public- 
school service. The said sum shall be apportioned to the States 
which qualify under the provisions of this Act in the proportions 
which the number of public-school teachers employed in teaching- 
positions in the respective States bear to the total number of pub- 
lic-school teachers so employed in the United States, not includ- 
ing outlying possessions, said apportionments to be based on sta- 
tistics collected annually by the Department of Education. All 
funds apportioned to a State for the preparation of teachers for 
public-school service shall be distributed and administered in ac- 
cordance with the laws of said State in like manner as the funds 
provided by State and local authorities for the same purpose, and 
the State and local educational authorities of said State shall de- 
termine the courses of study, plans, and methods for carrying out 
the purposes of this section within said State in accordance with 
the laws thereof. 

Sec.12. That in order to receive apportionment from one or 
more of the appropriations authorized in sections 7, 8, 9, jo, and 
1 1 of this Act a State shall by legislative enactment accept the 
provisions of this Act and provide for the distribution and ad- 
ministration of such funds as shall be apportioned to said State, 
and shall designate the State's chief educational authority, 
whether a State superintendent of public instruction, a commis- 
sioner of education, a State board of education, or other legally 
constituted chief educational authority, to represent said State in 
the administration of this Act, and such authority so designated 
shall be recognized by the Secretary of Education : Provided 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 99 

That in any State in which the legislature does not meet within 
one year after the passage of this Act, the Governor of said 
State, in so far as he may have authority so to do, may take such 
action, temporarily, as is herein provided to be taken by legislative 
enactment in order to secure the benefits of this Act, and such 
action by the Governor shall be recognized by the Secretary of 
Education for the purposes of this Act until the legislature of 
said vState shall have met in due course and been in session sixty 
days. 

In any State accepting the provisions of this Act the State 
Treasurer shall be designated and appointed as custodian of all 
funds received by said State as apportionments under the pro- 
visions of this Act, to receive and provide for the proper custody 
and disbursement of the same, such disbursements to be made in 
accordance with the legal provisions of said State. 

A State may accept the provisions of any one or more of 
the respective apportionments authorized in sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 
and 11 of this Act, and may defer the acceptance of any one 
or more of said apportionments : Provided, hozvever, That no 
money shall be apportioned to any State from any of the funds 
authorized to be appropriated by sections 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 of 
this Act, unless a sum at least equally as large shall be provided 
by said State, or by local authorities, or by both, for the same 
purpose : And provided further, That the sum or sums provided 
by the State and local authorities for the equalization of edu- 
cational opportunities, for the promotion of physical education, 
and for the preparation of teachers shall not be less for any 
year than the amount provided for the same purpose for the 
fiscal year next preceding the acceptance of the provisions of 
this Act by said State : And provided further, That no money 
apportioned to a State under any of the provisions of this Act 
shall be used by any State or local authority, directly or indirect- 
ly, for the purchase, rental, erection, preservation, or repair of 
any building or equipment, or for the purchase or rental of land, 
or for the payment of debts or the interest thereon. 

Sec. 13. That when a State shall have accepted the pro- 
visions of this Act and shall have provided for the distribution 
and administration of such funds as shall be apportioned to 
said State, and when the State's chief educational authority 
designated to present said State shall so report in writing to 
the Secretary of Education, and said report shall be approved 



ioo THE REFERENCE SHELF 

by the Governor of said State, showing that said State has com- 
plied with the provisions of this Act with respect to any one 
or more of the apportionments authorized in sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 
and 11 of this Act, and when annually thereafter a like report 
shall be filed with the Secretary of Education, approved by the 
Governor of said State, the Secretary of Education shall appor- 
tion to said State for the ensuing fiscal year such funds as said 
State may be entitled to receive under the provisions of this 
Act, and shall certify such apportionment or apportionments to 
the Secretary of the Treasury : Provided, That all the edu- 
cational facilities encouraged by the provisions of this Act and 
accepted by a State shall be organized, supervised, and adminis- 
tered exclusively by the legally constituted State and local 
educational authorities of said State, and the Secretary of Edu- 
cation shall exercise no authority in relation thereto ; and this 
Act shall not be construed to imply Federal control of education 
within the States, nor to impair the freedom of the States in the 
conduct and management of their respective school systems. 

Sec. 14. That the Secretary of Education is authorized to 
prescribe plans for keeping accounts of the expenditures of such 
funds as may be apportioned to the States under the provisions 
of this Act and to audit such accounts. If the Secretary of 
Education shall determine that the apportionment or apportion- 
ments made to a State for the current fiscal year are not 
being expended in accordance with the provisions ot this Act, 
he shall give notice in writing to the chief educational authority 
designated to represent said State, and to the Governor of said 
State, in duplicate, stating specifically wherein said State fails 
to comply with the provisions of this Act. If after being so 
notified a State fails to comply with the provisions of this Act, 
the Secretary of Education shall report thereon to Congress 
not latter than in his next annual report 

If any portion of the money received by the Treasurer of a 
State, under the provisions of this Act, for any of the purposes 
herein named shall, by action or contingency, be diminished or 
lost, the same shall be replaced by said State, and until so 
replaced no subsequent apportionment for such purpose shall be 
made to said State. If any part of the funds apportioned annu- 
ally to any State for any of the purposes named in sections 7, 
8, 9, 10, and 11 of this Act has not been expended for such 
purpose, a sum equal to such unexpended part shall be deducted 



THE TOWNER-STERLING BILL 101 

from the next succeeding annual apportionment made to said 
State for such purpose. 

Sec. 15. That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby author- 
ized and directed to pay quarterly to the Treasurer of each State 
such apportionment or apportionments as the Secretary of Edu- 
cation shall certify that said State is entitled to receive under 
the provisions of this Act. 

Sec. 16. That the chief educational authority designated 
to represent a State receiving any of the apportionments made 
under the provisions of this Act shall, not later than September 
1 of each year, make a report to the Secretary of Education 
showing the work done in said State in carrying out the pro- 
visions of this Act during the next preceding fiscal year, and 
the receipts and expenditures of money apportioned to said State 
under the provisions of this Act. If the chief educational 
authority designated to represent a State shall fail to report as 
herein provided, the Secretary of Education may discontinue all 
apportionments to said State until such report shall have been 
made. 

Sec. 17. That there is hereby created a National Council 
on Education to consult and advise with the Secretary of Edu- 
cation on subjects relating to the promotion and development 
of education in the United States. The Secretary of Education 
shall be chairman of said council, which shall be constituted as 
follows : (a) The chief educational authority of each State 
designated to represent said State in the administration of this 
Act; (b) not to exceed twenty-five educators representing the 
different interests in education, to be appointed annually by the 
Secretary of Education; (c) not to exceed twenty-five persons, 
not educators, interested in the results of education from the 
standpoint of the public, to be appointed annually by the Sec- 
retary of Education. Said council shall meet for conference 
once each year at the call of the Secretary of Education. The 
members shall serve without pay, but their actual expenses in- 
curred in attending the conferences called by the Secretary of 
Education shall be paid by the Department of Education. 

Sec. 18. That the Secretary of Education shall annually at 
the close of each fiscal year make a report in writing to Cong- 
ress giving an account of all moneys received and disbursed by 
the Department of Education and describing the work done by 
the department. He shall also, not later than December 1 of 



102 THE REFERENCE SHELF 

each year, make a report to Congress on the administration of 
sections 7, 8, g, io, n, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 of this Act, and 
shall include in said report a summary of the reports made to 
him by the several States showing the administration of this Act 
therein, and shall at the same time make such recommendations 
to Congress as will, in his judgment, improve public education 
in the United States. He shall also from time to time make 
such special investigations and reports as may be required of 
him by the President or by Congress. 

Sec. 19. That this Act shall take effect upon its passage, 
and all acts or parts of Acts in conflict with this Act are hereby 
repealed. 



Debate Material, 
Studkj Outlines, Bibliographies 

for ready use are issued in the following series 
SEND FOR CATALOG 

The Handbook Series 

19 titles. Each contains reprints of selected articles on 
one of the questions of the day, with bibliographies. Where the 
question is especially adapted to debate, briefs are included 
also. Prices range from $1.25 to $2.40 a volume. 

debaters 9 Handbook Series 

Similar to the Handbook Series. 26 titles, each contain- 
ing briefs, bibliographies and reprints of leading articles on both 
sides. $1.25-$2.40 each. 

Abridged 'Debaters' Handbook Series 

7 titles. Similar to the above series in scope but limited 
in size. Pamphlets. 25c-75c each. 

University debaters' Annuals 

One issued each year, containing several of the leading 
intercollegiate debates of the year, each on a pertinent question. 
Briefs and bibliographies are included. $1.80-$2.25 each. 

(OVER) 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

DEBATE MATERIAL, STUDY OUTLI 

debaters 9 Manual 020 312 978 6 

Tells how to organize a debating society and prepare a 
debate, with suggestions for obtaining material. $1.50 

Study Outline Series 

Arranged especially for clubs. Each pamphlet contains 
an outline for a year's study on some subject ot interest, and 
often references to the best material are included. Prices 15c 
to 50c. Special rates on quantity orders. 

SEND FOR CATALOG 

NOTE: — Users of these lists will find additional help in the Readers' 
Guide to Periodical Literature, the Cumulative Book Index, and other 
periodical indexes and book catalogs. Ask at your library for them. 



^ 



THE H. W. WILSON COMPANY 

958 University Avenue New York 



